'' 


1 


4 


<< 


f-itfv/          <!« 


V 


f  *v 

s.     *  t  / 


•    * 
1 


MEMOIRS 


PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH 


Elje  fflhttolj  $tates  of  Slmmca 

CONTAINING 

7.  A  NARRATIVE  OF  THE  ORGANIZATION  AND  OF  THE 

EARL  Y  MEASURES  OF  THE  CHURCH 

II.   ADDITIONAL  STATEMENTS  AND  REMARKS 

III.  AN  APPENDIX  OF  ORIGINAL  PAPERS 


RIGHT   REV.  WILLIAM  WHITE,  D.D. 


Edited  with  Notes  and  a  Sketch  of  the  Origin  and  Progress  of  the 
Colonial  Church 

BY  THE  REV.  B.  F.  DECOSTA 


NEW  YORK 
E.  P.  BUTTON  &  COMPANY 

713  BROADWAY 
i860 


COPYRIGHT 

1880 
BY  E.  P.  BUTTON  &  CO. 


Prest  rf  St.  Joh*land 

J.  y.  UttU  &•  Co.,  Stereotype  Foundry, 

10  Aitor  Plact,  N.  X  Suffolk  Co.,  N.  Y. 


PREFACE. 


THE  first  edition  of  the  "Memoirs  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church"  was  published  by  S.  Potter  &  Co.,  Philadelphia,  1820. 
The  title  page  of  that  edition  lacks  the  clause,  "from  its  organiza- 
tion up  to  the  present  day,"  which  occurs  on  that  of  the  second; 
while  the  author  is  described  as  Bishop  of  ' '  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania,"  instead  of  "Bishop 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church."  The  preface  and  table  of 
contents  of  the  first  edition  occupy  fifteen  pages,  and  the  body 
of  the  work  four  hundred  and  seventy-four.  It  is  an  octavo  volume, 
in  clear  bold  type,  superior  to  that  of  the  second  edition,  which 
contains  only  three  hundred  and  ninety-three  pages,  the  type  being 
smaller  and  the  measure  larger,  thus  giving  much  more  matter 
within  a  smaller  compass. 

Prior  to  1820,  however,  Bishop  White  had  given  some  attention 
to  the  subject.  His  first  treatment  of  it  appears  in  the  American  edi- 
tion of  Rees'  "New  Cyclopaedia,"  vol.  viii.,  part  2,  under  "Church." 
That  article  ends  with  the  death  of  Bishop  Parker,  found  on  page 
thirty-four  of  the  present  edition.  It  would  appear,  from  the  refer- 
ence to  Bishop  Parker,  that  the  part  of  the  "Cyclopaedia"  contain- 
ing the  article  came  out  prior  to  1807.  The  second  edition  of  the 
"Memoirs,"  evidently  was  published  just  before  Bishop  White's 
decease,  as  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  under  date  of  August 
ist,  1836,  refers  to  the  copy  sent  to  him  by  the  author. 

In  presenting  the  third  edition  of  the  "Memoirs  of  the  Church," 
care  has  been  taken  to  avoid  overloading  the  Narrative  with  notes, 
though  the  work  would  justify  copious  annotation.  The  editor  has 
restricted  himself  to  a  few  points,  in  connection  with  which  it  was 
conceived  that  brief  notes  were  required  for  the  convenience  of  the 
reader.  The  notes  thus  added  are  signed  "Ed." 


iv  PREFACE. 

It  has  been  considered  advisable,  however,  to  furnish  a  prefatory 
sketch  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  Colonial  Church  in  America. 
This  sketch  has  been  extended  into  the  period  of  the  Revolution, 
where  the  Narrative  of  Bishop  White  commences.  The  student  will 
thus  be  the  better  prepared  to  proceed  with  the  study  of  the  half 
century  that  follows.  This  sketch  has  been  made  as  brief  as  pos- 
sible, one  leading  object  of  the  writer  being  to  give  some  idea  of 
the  legal  status  of  the  Church  in  the  different  colonies.  Attention 
has  been  paid  to  the  origin  of  colonization  itself,  as  writers  in  the 
interest  of  non-Episcopal  denominations  have  sought  to  keep  the 
agency  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the  background  and  to  repre- 
sent our  country  as  indebted  solely  to  the  enterprise  of  their  co-relig- 
ionists. This  is  especially  the  case  in  connection  with  NCAV  .England/ 
the  colonization  of  which  region  was  the  legitimate  result  of  the  prior 
enterprise  of  loyal  sons  of  the  Church,  and  notably  of  Sir  Ferdinando 
Gorges. 

Though  Bishop  White's  work  is  composed  of  three  divisions,  it 
will  be  found  well  adapted  to  the  wants  of  the  general  reader;  while 
the  teacher  of  ecclesiastical  history  may  realize  special  advantages 
from  this  plan,  since  it  thus  takes  the  form  of  what  may  be  called 
a  progressive  class  book,  capable  of  valuable  service  in  competent 
hands.  The  previous  editions  had  no  index,  but  in  the  present 
edition  an  index  is  supplied. 

The  "^Memoirs"  have  been  republished  at  the  earnest  request 
of  many  of  the  clergy,  representing  all  shades  of  ecclesiastical  opin- 
ion; the  wisdom,  justice  and  comprehensiveness  of  the  views  of 
the  eminent  and  venerable  Bishop  being  fully  appreciated  and  ac- 
knowledged. Of  the  permanent  value  and  high  importance  of  the 
work  there  is  and  never  has  been  any  question,  and  it  is  now  sent 
forth  in  the  confident  expectation  that  it  will  continue  to  be  re- 
garded a  treasury  of  important  facts  respecting  the  origin  and  forma- 
tion of  the  American  Church. 

New  York,  August,  iSSo. 


THE  ORIGIN  AND  PROGRESS  OF  THE  COLONIAL 

CHURCH. 


Maritime  Enterprise — Albert  de  Prato — Frobisher — Wolfall — Walker  in  Norombega 
— Gilbert — Ralegh — Gosnold   and   Pring — Waymouth — The   Popham   Colony 

—  The   Plymouth  and  London  Companies  —  The   Pilgrims  of  Leyden — The 
Agency  of  the  Church  of  England — The  Settlement  of  Massachusetts — The 
Church  in  New  Hampshire — The  Church  in  Virginia — The  Church  in  New 
York  —  Maryland  —  Pennsylvania  —  North  Carolina — New  Jersey  —  Delaware 

—  Georgia  —  Rhode  Island  —  Connecticut  —  Massachusetts  —  King's  Chapel  — 
William  White. 

THE  Church  of  England  was  identified  with  the  prog- 
ress of  the  national  marine  from  the  earliest  times.  In 
sketching  an  outline  of  the  rise  of  that  Church  in  Amer- 
ica, it  is  therefore  necessary  to  trace  the  early  history  of 
English  maritime  enterprise. 

At  what  period  English  navigators  were  first  active  on 
the  Atlantic  at  the  north  and  west,  it  is  now  impossible 
to  say.  The  Venerable  Bede  shows  that  in  his  time  the 
British  sailors  were  accustomed  to  visit  Iceland,  and  the 
Anglo-Saxon  map  of  the  tenth  century  shows  that  island 
laid  down.  It  is  also  certain  that  the  English  were  in 
communication  with  Iceland  at  the  time  Denmark,  Nor- 
way and  Iceland  were  in  free  communication  with  Green- 
land; in  which  country  the  Church,  with  a  line  of  bishops, 
was  maintained  for  about  three  hundred  years.*  So  well 
informed  were  the  people  of  Iceland  concerning  affairs  in 
England,  that  the  death  of  the  Archbishop  of  York  was 


*  See  Rafn's  "  Antiquitales  Americana;"  and  "  Gronland'1  s  Historiskc 
Minde smcerker " ;  "Pre-Columbian  Discovery  of  America  by  the  Northmen," 
Albany  1868,  and  the  "Church  Review,"  Oct.  1869. 


vi  THE   COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

chronicled  there  in  1407.*  In  1436  the  Icelandic  Bishop 
of  Holum  was  living  in  London;  while,  in  1440,  Henry  VI. 
sent  two  ships  with  supplies  to  Iceland,  which  included 
wine  and  salt,  it  being  declared  that,  otherwise,  the  sac- 
raments would  be  discontinued.  It  is  manifestly  true,  that, 
by  means  of  this  intercourse  with  Iceland,  the  English  must 
have  known  of  the  land  at  the  west.  They,  however,  did 
not  appreciate  the  importance  of  this  knowledge,  any  more 
than  the  Icelanders  themselves;  and,  possibly,  no  English 
vessel  sailed  to  Greenland  at  that  period;  especially  as 
we  know  that  every  measure  was  taken  by  the  King  of 
Denmark  to  cripple  British  commerce. t 

The  first  evidence  of  the  activity  of  the  English  on  the 
Atlantic  at  the  west  is  found  in  the  year  1491,  when  a 
series  of  annual  voyages  was  commenced  from  Bristol,  to 
search  for  the  Island  of  Brazil  and  the  Seven  Cities.  This 
fact  was  recordedEy  Ayala,  the  Spanish  Ambassador  at 
the  English  Court. \  On  St.  John's  Day,  June  24th,  1497, 
John  Cabot,  in  advance  of  Columbus,  discovered  the  main- 
land of  America,  which  he  called  Prima  Vista.  Beyond 
question  he  had  some  chaplain  or  other  minister  of  religion 
with  him  in  his  ship,  "  the  Matthew,"  of  Bristol.  In  1498 
he  was  authorized  to  make  another  voyage  to  the  lands 
thus  found.  Some  have  maintained,  that,  during  the  voy- 
age, he  explored  the  American  coast  from  67°  N.,  to  Flor- 
ida, but  of  this  there  is  not  sufficient  proof.  Others  have 
also  supposed  that  Cabot  undertook  a  colony.§  Of  this, 
likewise,  the  proof  is  wanting.  Another  voyage  was  pro- 
jected for  Cabot  in  1517,  but  there  is  a  lack  of  evidence 
respecting  its  accomplishment.  Nevertheless,  the  voyage 
of  1497  was  not  barren  of  results.  In  1501,  Henry  VII. 


*  hlenzkir  AnndJar,  Hafnise,   1847  p.  382. 
t  See  Rymer's  "Fadera"  on  this  period. 

|  See  his  letter  to  Ferdinand  and  Isabella,  "Spanish  State  Papers,"  vol.  L 
p.  177. 

§  Thevet's  "Cosmographie  Universelle"  1575,  tome  ii.  p.  1014. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  vii 

.  authorized  a  new  expedition,*  while  Thorne  claims  that 
his  father  went  to  Newfoundland  in  1502.1  In  1504,  an 
entry  in  the  King's  privy  purse  shows  that  two  pounds 
were  paid  "to  a  preste  [priest]  that  goeth  to  the  new 
Islande." 

Before  any  thing  more  was  accomplished  by  the  Eng- 
lish, the  Spaniards  were  active  and  had  discovered  Florida, 
an  achievement  popularly  attributed  to  Ponce  de  Leon  in 
1513,  though  Martyr's  map,  in  his  "  Legatio  Babylonica," 
published  in  1511,  shows  that  Forida  was  discovered  long 
before.  The  Spaniards  usually  carried  priests  with  them, 
but  one  of  the  earliest  recorded  cases  of  the  administration 
of  the  Holy  Communion  in  North  America  was  in  con- 
nection with  the  death  of  the  Licentiate  Ayllon,  forty 
miles  southwest  of  the  "  Rio  Jordan,"  in  the  Carolinas, 
October  i8th,  15264  Two  years  earlier,  however,  relig- 
ious services  had  been  conducted  on  board  the  ship  of  Ver- 
razano  in  the  harbor  of  Newport,  Rhode  Island. § 

During  August,  1527,  the  English  suddenly  come  into 
full  view,  Henry  VIII.  having  two  ships  at  St.  John's,  New- 
foundland; on  one  of  which,  the  "  Mary  of  Guilford,"  was 
Albert  de  Prato,  a  canon  of  St.  Paul's,  London.  This  per- 
son was  a  man  of  learning,  and  particularly  well  skilled  in 
mathematics  and  navigation.  Nothing  has  yet  been  learned 
respecting  his  origin,  yet  he  appears  to  have  been  an  Ital- 
ian, and  was  probably  of  the  family  connected  with  the 
curious  old  City  of  Prato.  He  must  have  been  one  of  those 
favored  foreigners  introduced  by  Cardinal  Wolsey;  whom 
he  addressed  in  a  Latin  letter,  now  lost,  from  the  Harbor 


*  Biddle's  "Life  of  Cabot,"  p.  225,  234. 

t  Hakluyt's  "Divers  Voyages,"  Ed.  1850,  p.  51. 

\  Oviedo's  "flistoria  de  las  Indias,"  ii.  145,  and  iii.  628. 

§  "  Verrazano  the  Explorer,"  and  Hakluyt,  iii.  300.  It  may  be  noted  here  that 
on  the  first  voyage,  Columbus  did  not  appear  to  have  any  priest  with  him ;  and,  in- 
deed, he  served  as  a  kind  of  lay  preacher.  On  the  fourth  voyage,  Sunday,  August 
I4th,  1502,  he  landed  at  Punta  di  Castilia,  on  the  coast  of  Honduras,  where  the 
Mass  was  said.  "Historia  del  Sig.  Don  Fernando  Colombo,'"  M.kn,  1614,  p.  403. 


viii  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

of  St.  John's.*  De  Prato  sailed  with  John  Rutt,  one  of 
Henry's  sturdy  captains,  who,  in  1513,  had  been  master  of 
the  "  Lord  Sturton."  This  canon  of  St.  Paul's  is  of  especial 
interest,  for  the  reason  that  he  is  the  first  known  clerical 
representative  of  the  Church  of  England  in  America.  Nev- 
ertheless he  represented  the  unreformed  Church.  In  the 
year  1527,  his  patron,  Cardinal  Wolsey,  was  engaged  in 
the  prosecution  of  Bilney,  who  recanted  his  heresy,  and 
escaped  by  carrying  a  fagot  on  his  shoulder  during  a  ser- 
mon at  Paul's  Cross.  From  St.  John  the  "  Mary  of  Guil- 
ford  "  sailed  towards  Cape  Breton,  a  port  in  the  south  side 
of  which  island  was  called  "  Arembec,"  afterwards  he  re- 
turned to  England.f  There  is  no  mention  of  any  religious 
service,  though  without  doubt  the  offices  of  religion  were 
performed. 

From  the  year  1527  the  English  were  more  or  less  active 
in  connection  with  the  fisheries  of  the  New  World,  but  few 
records  of  the  period  have  come  down  to  us.  It  is  not 
until  1567  that  another  Englishman  appears,  a  wander- 
ing sailor  from  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  one  David  Ingram, 
the  first  Englishman  now  known  to  have  "entered  New 
England,  though  his  visit  was  destitute  of  ecclesiastical 
interest. :£ 

Frobisher  appears  next  among  the  voyagers,  and  with  him, 
on  the  voyage  of  1578,  came  the  first  known  representa- 
tive of  the  ReformecT  'Church  of  England,  "  Maister  Wol- 
fall,"  "Minister  and  Preacher,"  who  was  charged  "to  serve 
God  twice  a  day,  with  the  ordinary  service  usual  in  the 
Church  of  England."  In  the  Countess  of  Warwick's  Sound 
they  landed,  and  Wolfall  "preached  a  godly  sermon"  and 


•  Purchas  iii.  809;  Hakluyt  iii.  129. 

f  "The  Northmen  in  Maine,"  p.  43.  "Arembec"  was  a  port  in  Cape  Bre- 
ton not  to  be  confused  with  Norombega.  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  show  that 
the  "  Mary  of  Guilford  "  visited  many  of  the  ports  of  Maine,  but  of  this  there  is  no 
proof.  See  Maine  Co'l.  zd.  series,  vol.  i.  p.  381. 

\  See  Hakluyt's  volume  of  1589,  p.  557;  and  the  Tanner  MSS.  79,  fol.  172, 
preserved  in  the  Bodleian  Library. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  ix 

"celebrated  also  a  Communion"  the  first  English  Commun- 
ion recorded  in  connection  with  the  New  World.* 

In  1580  an  experimental  voyage  was  made  to  Maine  by 
one  John  Walker,  who,  it  would  seem,  afterwards  became 
a  clergyman  ;f  and  1583  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert  made  a 
voyage  and  proclaimed  a  regular  order  of  government  in 
Newfoundland,  including  the  Church. 

Afterwards  he  proceeded  towards  a  place  in  New  Eng- 
land called  "  Norombega";  but,  losing  a  ship  near  Sable 
Island,  he  was  forced  to  sail  for  England,  though  the  lit- 
tle vessel  he  was  in  went  down  on  the  way,  the  last  words 
of  the  brave  knight  being,  "  It  is  as  near  to  heaven  by  sea 
as  by  land."  \  The  miscarriage  of  this  enterprise  was  a 
serious  event.  But  for  the  loss  of  his  great  ship,  the  "  De- 
light," a  Church  of  England  colony  might  have  been  es- 
tablished on  the  Penobscot,  and,  possibly,  fixed  the  re- 
ligious history  of  the  region  for  all  time.  During  the  April 
preceding  the  voyage,  Christopher  Carlisle  laid  out  a 
plan  for  a  colony  which  he  proposed  to  fix  near  latitude 
40°  N.,  and  which  would  have  especial  attractions  for  the 
"godly  minded,"  inasmuch  as  they  would  have  no  "  idol- 


*  See  Hakluyt  Ed.  1600,  iii.  pp.  84,  91;  and  "Domestic  State  Papers," 
1547-1580,  vol.  ex.  2;  cxi.  48,  49;  cxvi.  25;  cxviii.  36,  39,  41,  42,  43;  cxix.  8,  9, 
10,  12,  14,  15;  cxxii.  3;  cxxiii.  5.  Here  let  us  add  the  deserved  tribute  to  Wolfall, 
of  whom  it  is  said, 

"This  Maister  Wolfall  being  well  seated  and  setled  at  home  in  his  owue  Coun- 
trey,  with  a  good  and  large  living,  having  a  good  honest  woman  to  wife  and  very 
towardly  children,  being  of  good  reputation  among  the  best,  refused  not  to  take 
in.  hand  this  painfull  voyage,  for  the  onley  care  he  had  to  save  soules,  and  to 
re  forme  the  Infidels  if  it  were  possible  to  Christianitie:  and  also  partly  for  the 
great  desire  he  had  that  this  notable  voyage  so  well  begunne,  might  be  brought 
to  perfection:  and  therefore  he  was  contented  to  stay  there  the  whole  yeare  if 
occasion  had  served,  being  in  every  necessary  action  as  the  resolutest  men  of  all. 
Wherefore  in  this  behalfe  may  rightly  be  called  a  true  Pastor  and  minister  of 
God's  word,  which  for  the  profile  of  his  flocke  spared  not  to  venture  his  owne 
life." 

t  The  authority  for  this  is  in  MS. 

I  Hakluyt  iii.  243;  and  "The  Lost  City  of  New  England,"  with  Beauvois' 
"La  Norambegue,'n  Paris,  1880. 


X  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

atrous  religion  "  forced  upon  them,  as  in  Roman  Catholic 
Countries.* 

In  1584,  while  Gilbert  was  sleeping  in  his  ocean  grave, 
Sir  Walter  Ralegh  undertook  the  colonization  of  Virginia. 
This  enterprise  was  pursued  until  1590,  when  the  colony, 
whose  sad  history  is  so  well  known,  became  extinct.  The 
pilot  of  the  first  expedition  was  Simon  Ferdinando,  who, 
by  accident,  grounded  one  of  the  ships,  though  some  have 
supposed  that  it  was  done  by  design. t  The  clergyman 
connected  with  White's  company  of  1587  baptized  Manteo, 
an  Indian  Chief  as  "  Lord  of  Roanoake,  and  Dasamon- 
peake,"  and,  about  the  same  time,  Virginia  Dare,  called 
the  "  first  Christian  born  in  Virginia,"  was  also  baptized.:}: 
Another  glimpse  of  English  enterprise  is  had  in  the  voy- 
age of  Gosnold  in  1602.  This  person,  styled  the  "  Dis- 
coverer" of  Cape  Cod,  passed  some  weeks  upon  an  island 
not  far  from  Martha's  Vineyard,  now  known  as  Cuttyhunk. 
The  narrative  teaches  that  the  voyage,  which  contem- 
plated a  colony,  was  sanctioned  by  Sir  Walter  Ralegh; 
and  Congregationalists  in  New  England  for  many  years 
extolled  the  undertaking,  teaching  that  the  enterprise  lay 
at  the  foundation  of  New  England  Colonization,  thus  seek- 
ing to  antedate  the  Popham  Colony  of  1607. §  It  was, 
however,  the  fortune  of  the  writer  to  show  from  original 
documents  that  the  theory  embodied  serious  errors,  inas- 
much as  the  enterprise  had  no  sanction,  while  those  con- 


*  Hakluyt  iii.  143;  "  Dom.  Eliz.  Calendar,"  vol.  xcv.  no  63,  p.  475. 

t  Dr.  Hawks  calls  this  person  a  "contemptible  mariner,"  and  a  "treacherous 
viHain." — "Hist,  of  N.  Carolina,"  i.  196.  This  was  an  error,  as  Lane  ("  Archeo- 
logia  /Imfrifana,"  iv.  n),  gives  the  very  best  proof  of  his  capacity  and  worth. 

{  This  has  many  times  been  referred  to  as  the  first  baptism  in  Virginia;  yet  the 
Spaniards  were  there  before  the  English,  and  in  1574  had  established  a  mission  and 
performed  baptism.  See  article  in  the  "Churchman,"  November  9,  1872,  based  on 
MSS.  and  Hakluyt  iii:  284. 

§  "Proceedings  of  the  American  Antiquarian  Society,"  April  26th,  1865,  p.  42. 
For  the  narratives  of  the  voyage,  see  Mass.  Coll.,  3d  series,  vol.  viii.  and 
"Purchas  His  Pilgrimes,"  iv.  p.  1651.  See  also  Hatfield  MSS.  vol.  xciv.,  160, 
and  Edward's  "Life  of  Ralegh,"  ii.  251. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH,  xi 

cerned  were  prosecuted  for  trespass  upon  their  return  *  by 
Sir  Walter.  The  ecclesiastical  interest  connected  with  the 
voyage  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  supercargo,  William 
Salterne,  soon  afterwards  took  Orders  in  the  Church;  which 
induces  the  belief  that  any  religious  services  held  by  the 
people  while  in  the  country  were  according  to  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer. 

The  next  year,  1603,  another  expedition,  this  time  by 
authority,  came  out  under  Martin  Pring,  William  Salterne 
again  being  in  the  company.  The  expedition  harbored 
at  Plymouth  during  a  stay  of  several  weeks;  and  the  rea- 
sonable conclusion  may  be  that  the  services  of  the  Church 
consecrated  that  region  seventeen  years  before  the  arrival 
of  the  "May  Flower."  In  the  year  1605,  a  voyage  of  very 
great  importance  was  made  to  New  England  by  James 
Waymouth.  In  1602  he  had  undertaken  a  fruitless  expe- 
dition to  the  northwest  with  Cartwright  for  chaplain;  but, 
respecting  the  original  destination  of  the  voyage  of  1605, 
we  are  left  to  conjecture,  though  it  is  certain  that  he  sailed 
from  England  on  Easter  Sunday,  and  reached  Booth's 
Bay,  Maine,  on  WThitsunday,  calling  the  harbor  "  Pente- 
cost." From  this  harbor  he  discovered  and  explored  the 
Kennebec,  the  ancient  "  Sagadahoc."  He  also  seized  five 
of  the  natives,  whom  he  carried  to  England.  Sir  Fer- 
dinando  Gorges,  that  stout,  loyal  old  churchman,  says, 
"  This  accident  was  the  means  under  God  of  putting  on 
foot  and  giving  life  to  all  our  plantations."  These  na- 
tives were  taught  English  and  trained  for  service  in  the 
colony. 

It  is  not  known  that  Waymouth  had  a  chaplain  with 
him,  yet  it  is  certain  that  the  services  of  the  Church  were 
regularly  performed  on  board  the  ship,  and  that  the  natives 
were  often  in  attendance,  being  deeply  impressed.  Crosses 
were  set  up,  in  token  both  of  their  faith  and  of  their  in- 
tended occupation  of  the  country,  while  Rosier  distinctly 

*  "New  England  Historical  Genealogical  Register,"  1878,  p.  76. 


xii  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

declares,  "  a  public  good  and  true  zeal  of  promulgating 
God's  holy  Church,  by  planting  Christianity,  to  be  the  sole 
intent  of  the  honorable  setters  forth  of  this  discovery."* 

From  1605  onward,  the  agency  of  churchmen  in  colon- 
ization is  evident.  April  loth,  1606,  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges, 
in  connection  with  Sir  John  Topham,  obtained  by  royal 
\  ,  charter  a  tract  of  country  extending  from  Nova  Scotia  to 
the  Carolinas.  The  same  year  a  ship^vas  sent  out  under 
Pring  to  complete  the  survey  of  Waymouth;  while,  June 
ist,  1607,  the  "Mary  and  John"  and  "The  Gift  of  God" 
sailed  for  Maine  with  upwards  of  a  hundred  colonists. 
The  ships  were  separated  during  the  voyage,  but  met 
in  August  at  the  Island  of  Monhegan  near  the  Kennebec. 

Historians  have  dwelt  upon  the  religiousness  of  the  Ply- 
mouth Pilgrims  who  spent  their  first  Sunday  on  Clark's 
Island,  faithfully  observing  the  day;  but  the  men  of  the 
"Mary  and  John"  and  "The  Gift  of  God"  were  not  less 
duteous  than  those  of  the  "  May  Flower."  Landing  upon 
this  romantic  and  well-wooded  isle,  then  clothed  in  pri- 
meval forests  fragrant  with  the  perfume  of  the  pine  and 
hemlock  mingled  with  the  odor  of  the  wild  rose,  they  set 
up  their  simple  altar  under  the  shadow  of  a  tall  cross  that 
had  been  planted  previously  and  which  was  seen  by  the 
voyager  afar.  There  they  celebrated  the  service  of  the 
Church  in  simplicity  and  faith.  We  copy  the  memoran- 
dum, verbatim: 

"  Son day e  beinge  the  Qth  of  August  in  the  morninge  the 
most  part  of  our  holl  company  of  both  our  shipes  landed 
on  this  Illand  the  wch  we  call  St.  George's  Illand  whear 
the  crosse  standeth  and  thear  we  heard  a  sermon  delyvred 
unto  us  by  our  preacher  gguinge  God  thanks  for  our  hap- 
py metinge  and  safie  aryvall  into  the  contry  &  so  retorned 
abord  aggain." 

The  preacher  was  the  Rev.  Richard  Seymour,  a  minister 

.  n    

*  See  "Journal"  in  Mass.  Coll.,  3d  series,  vol.  viii.  p.  125;  and  Purchas  iv. 
p.  1659;  also  the  original  "True  Relation,"  London,  1605. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xiii 

of  the  Church  of  England,  to  whom  belongs  the  honor  of 
having  preached  the  first  sermon  known  to  have  been  de- 
livered in  New  England.  On  the  ipth  of  August,  a  site 
was  selected  for  the  colony  at  the  mouth  of  the  Kennebec, 
and  the  work  of  building  a  fort  was  commenced.  This  oc- 
casion was  also  solemnized  by  a  sermon,  showing  that  the 
undertaking  was  conceived  in  the  spirit  of  the  Psalmist, 
"Except  the  Lord  build  the  house,  they  labor  in  vain 
that  build  it."  The  fort  was  finished,  together  with  a 
chapel  and  dwelling  houses;  and  here  the  services  of  the 
Church  of  England  were  celebrated.  This  was  a  regularly 
officered  community,  established  upon  a  moral  and  legal 
basis.  Under  the  charter,  two  companies  had  been  formed, 
the  Plymouth  Company  and  the  London  Company;  the  for- 
mer selecting  New  England  and  the  latter  Virginia,  as  the 
scene  of  colonization.  The  charter  gave  the  men  of  Sagada- 
hoc  the  power  of  life  and  death,  authorizing  them  to  collect 
taxes  and  imposts  and  coin  money.  When  the  spring  came, 
however,  owing  to  the  death  of  Captain  Popham,  their 
leader,  and  other  causes,  they  were  so  much  discouraged 
that  they  abandoned  the  settlement  and  returned  home.* 
In  1609  Henry  Hudson,  with  a  mixed  crew  of  English 
and  Dutch,  made  his  voyage  up  the  river  which  bears  his 
name,  his  voyage  having  originally  been  projected  under 
French  influence,  though  he  was  advised  to  search  for  a 
/  strait  to_IncUa.  in  the  region  of  the  Hudson  by  Captain 
*  John  Smith.  Henry  Hudson  was  an  Englishman  and  a 
communicant  of  the  Church,  though  the  Dutch  reaped 
the  fruit  of  his  voyage  of  i6oo,.t 

*  A  manuscript  containing  a  narrative  of  events  connected  with  this  colony  was 
first  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  public  by  the  author,  who  found  it  in  the  Lambeth 
Palace  Library.  Mr.  Palfrey  considered  it  as  "lost."  It  appears,  with  a  full  ac- 
count of  the  entire  transaction,  in  the  "Proceedings  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical 
Society  for  May,  1880,"  and  is  printed  separately.  See  also,  the  "Popham  Me- 
morial," edited  by  the  Rev.  Edward  Ballard,  D.T). 

t  The  Hudson  was  discovered  in  1525,  and  named  Rio  de  St.  Antonio.  On 
Hudson's  voyage,  see  the  letters  of  Jeanin  and  Henry  IV.,  in  Pettitot's  "Me~ 
moires,"  xv.  141,  232,  421;  also  "The  Sailing  Directions  of  Henry  Hudson." 


Xiv  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

From  1608  the  English  fishermen  were  active  on  the 
coast  of  Maine,  and  held  the  ground  against  the  French,* 
whose  Jesuit  settlement  at  Mount  Desert  was  captured  and 
broken  up  in  1612,  by  Argall  from  Virginia.!  Yet,  down 
to  the  year  1620,  there  does  not  appear  to  have  been  any 
permanent  English  settlement  along  the  coast.  Neverthe- 
less the  influence  of  the  Popham  Colony  was  not  lost,  as  it 
paved  the  way  for  fresh  operations.  In  this  connection, 
too,  it  must  be  noticed  that  the  work  in  New  England  and 
in  Virginia  was  one,  both  colonies  being  under  the  general 
Council  of  Thirteen.  Reserving,  therefore,  the  Virginia  Col- 
ony for  separate  notice,  let  us  point  out  the  fact  that  New 
England  was  settled  under  the  authority  of  the  same  com- 
pany of  churchmen  who  prosecuted  the  work  at  the  South. 
It  may  be  said  that  when  the  Plyjnputh_  Pilgrims  landed 
in  1620  no  English  settlement  was  known  upon  the  coast, 
but  this  is  not  a  technical  question.  At  the  time  they 
landed  one  branch  of  the  work  was  established  in  Virginia, 
while  the  necessary  steps  had  already  been  taken  to  carry 
on  the  work  in  New  England.  Experiments  had  been 
made,  and  the  company  was  now  ready  for  permanent 
work.  The  seed  was  sown,  even  though  no  green  blade 
had  appeared  above  the  soil  in  token  of  the  coming  harvest. 
This  leads  to  the  consideration  of  the  fact,  that  the  men 
who  had  labored  for  the  Popham  Colony  and  for  the  twelve 
years  following  maintained  ships  in  New  England  defend- 
ing their  interests  and  repelling  intruders,  had  secured 
a  new  patent,  signed  by  the  King  in  November,  1620,  put- 
ting them  in  absolute  possession  of  the  territory  from  40°  N. 
to  48°  N.  They  were  entitled  to  the  patent  for  various  rea- 
sons, and  especially  in  consideration  of  what  they  had  done 
to  protect  the  coast  against  the  French.  But  for  this  fact 
the  settlement  at  Plymouth  might  have  been  an  impossi- 


*  See  Carayon's  "Premiere  Mission,"  p.  62. 

t  On  his  treatment  of  the  Dutch  at  New  York,  See  No.  622  "  Amer.  and  W. 
India  Papers,"  1661-8. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  XV 

bility.  It  was  under  this  new  patent  that  throngs  of  emi- 
grants poured  into  New  England.  From  the  patentees, 
who  were  known  as  the  "Plymouth  Company,"  the  Leyden 
Pilgrims  received  authority  to  settle.*  Sailing  for  the 
region  of  the  Hudson,  a  storm  drove  them  to  Cape  Cod, 
whence  they  went  to  the  place  which  in  1616  had  received 
the  name  of  "Plymouth"  from  no  less  a  churchman  than 
Prince  Charles.t  At  Plymouth,  however,  they  were  in- 
truders; but  the  company  at  home,  which  was  composed 
of  loyal  churchmen,  recognizing  the  merits  of  the  men 
thus  providentially  cast  within  their  jurisdiction,  con- 
sented to  have  them  remain;  and,  September  Qth,  1621, 
gave  them  a  charter  to  the  lands  which  they  occupied. 
The  charter  was  signed,  among  others,  by  Sir  Ferdinando 
Gorges,  who  took  a  lively  interest  in  the  establishment 
of  the  Plymouth  settlement,  notwithstanding  he  disap- 
proved of  the  principles  entertained  by  leading  spirits  at 
that  place.  The  people  at  Plymouth  experienced  little 
else  but  kindness  and  courtesy  from  the  churchmen  who 
controlled  affairs  in  connection  with  New  England.  This 
kindness  was  generally  reciprocated  by  the  Plymouth  peo- 
ple, who  were  of  a  gentler  disposition  than  the  men  of  Mas- 
sachusetts Bay.  The  majority  of  the  men  of  the  "May 
Flower,"  in  fact,  were  more  or  less  in  sympathy  with  the 
Church  at  home4  They  never  denied  their  indebtedness 
to  the  Plymouth  Company,  and  it  has  remained  for  some 
of  their  descendants  to  undervalue  the  work  of  those 
churchmen  who  warmed  the  Pilgrim  Colony  into  life. 

Sir   Ferdinando  was  a  churchman,   but  he  acted  as  a 
citizen  of  a  great  country;  and  at  a  time  when  he  might 


*  Not  a  few  have  supposed  that  by  the  "Plymouth  Company,"  the  Plymouth 
or  Leyden  Pilgrims  were  meant. 

t  Before  going  to  Plymouth  they  discussed  the  propriety  of  selecting  Ipswich, 
described  by  Smith,  whose  map  they  had  in  their  hands.  They  decided,  however, 
upon  Plymouth,  where  Coppin  their  pilot  had  been  in  times  past.  See  Young's 
"Chronicles,"  pp.  147-8. 

%  Bradford  says  that  the  most  part  of  the  people  desired  to  keep  Christmas. 


xvi  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

have  given  the  entire  subject  a  sectarian  tinge,  he  confessed 
that  it  was  Waymouth's  voyage  of  1605,  in  connection  with 
the  Indians  captured,  that,  under  God,  "  put  life  into  all 
the  plantations."  Indeed  it  was  a  Pemaquid  chief  who  had 
lived  on  friendly  terms  with  his  representatives  in  Maine, 
that  met  the  Pilgrims,  saying,  "Welcome,  Englishmen!" 
The  year  before  they  arrived,  Captain  Dermer,  one  of  the 
agents  of  the  company,  had  arranged  a  peace  with  the 
Indians  around  Plymouth.* 

A  class  of  writers  on  this  general  subject  have  assumed, 
with  great  assurance,  that  New  England  colonization  re- 
sulted solely  from  persecution,  and   Hutchinson  approves 
the  following:  "The  son  of  one  of  the  first  ministers,  in  a^ 
preface  to  a  sermon  preached  soon  after  the  Revolution  re-  { 
marks,  that  if  the  bishops  in  the  reign  of  King  Charles  I.   ) 
had  been  of  the  same  spirit  with  those  in  the  reign  of  King- 
William,  there  would  have  been  no  New  England. "1 

When  such  things  are  said  with  a  large  degree  of  con- 
fidence they  are  liable  to  be  accepted  by  certain  classes  of 
readers.  Poetry  also  lends  a  power  to  misrepresentations 
of  this  kind.  An  illustration  is  found  in  that  winning  com- 
position by  Andrew  Marvell,  "the  Emigrant."  He  sings, 

•Where  the  remote  Bermudas  ride 
In  Ocean's  bosom  unespied, 
From  a  small  boat  that  rowed  along 
The  listening  waves  received  this  song: — 

" '  What  should  we  do  but  sing  His  praise 
That  led  us  through  the  watery  maze 
Unto  an  Isle  so  long  unknown, 
And  yet  far  kinder  than  our  own ! ' ' 

Then,  the  poet  goes  on  to  say,  among  other  things: 

"He  lands  us  on  a  grassy  stage 
Safe  from  the  storms,  and  prelates'  rage." 

*  Purchas,  iv.  p.  1778;  and  "N.  Y.  Hist.  Society's  Collections,"  2d  series, 
vol.  i.  p.  343.  An  attempt  was  made  to  cheapen  the  value  of  Dermer's  act,  but  it 
remains  an  important  link  in  the  series  of  events. 

t  "History  of  Massachusetts  Bay,"  i.  p.  368,  Ed.  1795. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xvii 

These  lines  have  led  multitudes  astray,  and  it  is  very 
difficult  to  make  some  comprehend  the  fact  that  the  colo-  ] 
nization  of  the  Bermudas  was  originally  undertaken  by 
prelates,  such  as  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the  Bish- 
ops of  Lincoln,  Bath  and  Wells  and  Worcester,  supported 
by  thirty  peers  and  peeresses  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Those  two  Church  of  England  worthies,  Hakluyt  and 
Purchas,  were  conspicuous  in  the  advocacy  of  colonization; 
both  of  these  men  writing  and  preaching  to  advance  their 
views,  and  expending  considerable  money  either  directly  or 
indirectly  to  carry  on  the  work.  In  1585  Hakluyt  drew  up 
what  he  called  "  Inducements  to  the  liking  of  the  voyage 
intended  towards  Virginia  in  40  and  42  degrees  of  latitude." 
These  were  printed  with  Gosnold's  Relation  in  1602  and 
scattered  broadcast.  The  "  Inducements  "  were  originally 
drawn  up  with  reference  to  the  voyage  of  Humphrey  Gil- 
bert, but  beyond  question  they  were  in  the  hands  of  the 
Pilgrims  of  Leyden,  who  were  sailing  for  the  latitude  40°  N., 
when  they  found  a  harbor  at  Cape  Cod.  "This  land  that 
we  propose  to  direct  our  course  to,"  he  says,  lies  "in  part 
in  the  40  degree,"  a  climate  supposed  very  favorable  to  the 
vine,  which  was  to  be  propagated  by  cuttings  obtained 
of  the  Bishop's  gardener  at  Fulham.  His  directions  for  the 
colony  cover  every  conceivable  point.*  The  prime  object 
of  colonization,  Hakluyt  declares,  being  "  to  plant  Chris- 
tian religion."  The  idea  of  founding  a  refuge  against  "per-  j 
secution"  never  seems  to  have  occurred  to  his  mind;  while, f 
on  the  other  hand,  he  often  referred  to  the  over-crowded ^ 
population,  the  multitudes  of  young  men  growing  up  in^ 
enforced  idleness,  and  the  necessity  of  finding  new  markets 
for  British  manufactures. 

In  1622,  so  thoroughly  had  the  idea  of  colonization  taken 
possession  of  the  best  men  in  the  Church  of  England,  that 


*  These  Inducements  are  to  be  found  in  the  Mass.  Coll.  3d  series,  vol.  viii.  p. 
104,  and  more  at  large  in  the  Maine  Coll.  2d  series,  vol.  ii.  edited  by  Charles 
Deane,  LL.D. 


xviii  THE   COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  ordered  a  collection  to  be 
made  "in  all  the  several  parishes  within  the  Kingdome  of 
England,"  in  aid  of  the  colonization  of  Newfoundland;  and 
a  copy  of  Whitbourne's  book  on  the  subject  was  printed 
and  sent  to  every  parish.  It  is  therefore  idle  to  fancy  that 
colonization  resulted  from  the  wrong-headed  treatment  of 
a  kind  of  wrong-headedness.  The  time  for  the  conquest 
of  the  wilderness  had  come. 

In  the  vicinity  of  Massachusetts  Bay,  churchmen  were 
the  first  colonists.  As  early  as  1622,  Thomas  Morton, 
established  himself  at  Merry  Mount;  and  in  1622  and  1623 
colonies  were  attempted  at  Weymouth.  Indeed  Sir  Fer- 
dinando  evidently  intended  to  secure  the  ground  to  the 
Church.  In  the  company  of  1623  came  the  Rev.  William 
Morrell,  who  had  been  appointed  an  ecclesiastical  com- 
missioner. While  in  the  country  he  composed  a  Latin 
poem  on  New  England,  translating  it  into  English.  This 
poem  abounds  with  missionary  aspirations.*  Again,  long 
before  Winthrop  and  his  company  came  to  settle  at  Bos- 
ton, the  three  peninsulas  of  the  harbor  had  been  taken  pos- 
session of  by  churchmen.  At  Charlestown  dwelt  Thomas 
\Valford,t  afterwards  banished,  and  who  became  the  first 
church  warden  in  New  Hampshire.  At  East  Boston, 
Samuel  Maverick  lived  in  his  fort;  while  at  Boston  the 
Rev.  William  Blackstone,  alone  in  a  little  cottage,  led  a 
quiet,  contemplative  life.  Blackstone  had  been  on  the 
ground  a  number  of  years,  and  apparently  came  out 
with  authority  from  the  New  England  Company.  The 
intentions  of  Sir  Ferdinando  respecting  the  ecclesiastical 
character  of  the  colony  that  he  expected  to  establish  have 
been  recognized. +  Some  indeed  have  made  these  inten- 
tions a  ground  of  complaint,  showing  that  his  policy  was 
insisted  upon,  after  it  became  impracticable.  From  this  it 


•  A  copy  which  wants  the  title  page  is  in  the  library  of  the  Mass.  Hist.  Society. 

f  See  Frothingham's  "History  of  Charlestown." 

\  "Proceedings  of  the  Mass.  Hist.  Society,  July,  1878,"  p.  196. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xix 

appears  that  he  and  his  brother  churchmen  were  earnestly 
engaged  in  promoting  the  colonization  of  New  England. 
It  was  also  contemplated  that  the  colonists  going  thither 
would  remain  in  the  Church  of  England,  however  they 
might  modify  certain  usages.  When  Endicott  came  over 
to  Salem  with  his  company  in  1628  there  was  no  apparent 
design  of  separation;  and  the  Rev.  Ralph  Smith,  being 
suspected  of  a  tendency  that  way,  that  is,  of  having  a 
"difference  of  judgement  in  some  things  from  other  min- 
isters," was  refused  a  passage  by  the  Company,  until  he 
had  given  satisfactory  assurance  respecting  his  conduct 
while  within  the  Company's  jurisdiction.  Their  language, 
on  leaving  home  was,  "  Farewell  the  Church  of  God  i 
England,  and  all  Christian  friends  there  !  We  do  not 
to  New  England  as  separatists  from  the  Church  of  Eng-  /) 
land,"  etc. 

Winthrop's  Company  of  1630,  on  leaving  England,  like- 
wise disavowed  all  designs  of  separation;  and  in  writing  to 
remove  "  suspicions  and  misconstructions  of  their  inten- 
tions," declare  that  they  "esteem  it  an  honour  to  call  the 
Church  of  England  from  whence  wee  rise  our'deare  mother." 

Again,  the  settlement  made  at  Boston,  in  1630,  was 
largely  the  immediate  result  of  efforts  put  forth  by  Thomas 
Lake,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,*  and  the  Rev.  John 
White,  Rector  of  Dorchester,  t  both  of  whom,  while  sym- 


*  Bishop  Lake,  brother  of  Sir  Thomas  Lake,  was  born  at  Southampton.  He 
was  appointed  to  the  See  of  Bath  and  Wells  in  1616,  dying  in  1626,  and  being  suc- 
ceeded by  Laud.  A  volume  of  his  sermons  was  published  in  1629. 

t  The  Rev.  John  White,  A.  M.,  was  bom  at  Stanton,  in  Oxfordshire,  1576, 
being  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  Dorchester,  from  1606  to  1648,  and  dying  in  the 
latter  year  on  July  2ist,  at  the  age  of  seventy-two.  He  preached  against  Popish 
ceremonies  and  was  persecuted  by  Laud,  besides  having  his  house  plundered  by 
Prince  .Rupert.  His  ashes  rest  under  the  porch  of  St.  Peter's,  Dorchester.  Fuller 
says,  that  "by  his  wisdom  and  ministerial  labors  Dorchester  was  much  enriched 
with  knowledge,  piety  and  industry." — Brooks'  "Lives,"  iii.  89-90;  and  Thorn- 
ton's "Landing  at  Cape  Ann,"  p.  39.  He  was  a  practical  man,  and,  with  Bishop 
Lake,  deserves  recognition  as  one  of  the  founders  of  the  colony  of  Massachusetts 
Bay. 


XX  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

pathizing  with  the  Puritans,  steadfastly  opposed  separa- 
tion, viewing  the  Plymouth  colonists  with  aversion.  For 
several  years  both  of  these  excellent  men  had  done  every 
thing  in  their  power  to  encourage  the  attempt  to  colonize 
at  Cape  Ann.  The  Bishop  said  that  he  would  go  to  New 
England  and  engage  in  the  work  personally,  but  for  his 
advanced  age.* 

Such  then  was  the  origin  of  this  movement  and  the  re- 
ligious opinions  of  the  colonists.  It  was,  therefore,  sup- 
posed in  England,  that  upon  their  arrival  in  this  country 
they  would  abide  by  their  principles.  This  was  the  belief 
of  no  less  a  person  than  the  Rev.  John  Cotton,  who  did  not 
come  over  until  1633. t  Yet  a  radical  change  took  place 
in  their  views,  and  when  Mr.  Cotton  heard  of  it  he  was 
shocked.  News  came  to  him  from  Salem,  that  Skelton 
had  pronounced  for  separation,  and  had  gone  so  far  as  to 
refuse  the  sacrament  to  Winthrop  and  others,  including 
Coddington;  and  had  also  refused  to  baptize  the  latter's 
child,  because  he  adhered  to  the  Church  of  England,  as  did 
Winthrop.  Cotton  condemns  all  this,  and  in  writing  says, 
that  it  added  wonder  to  his  grief  that  Skelton  had  not  only 
refused  this  baptism,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  had  welcomed 
to  the  Communion  one  who  had  been  a  member  of  a  Sep- 
aratist congregation  in  London,  and  baptized  his  child. 
Cotton  says  reproachfully,  "you  went  hence  of  another 
judgement.''*  Yet  this  man  erelong  came  to  Boston  and 
adopted  the  same  course  himself.  Was  it,  then,  hypocrisy 
on  the  part  of  these  men  in  professing  loyalty  to  the  Church 
and  aversion  to  Separatism  ?  It  is  not  necessary  to  con- 


•  Hugh  Peters'  "Legacy  to  his  Daughter,"  Boston,  1817,  and  Anderson's 
"Colonial  Church,"  vol.  ii.  p.  366,  Ed.  1848. 

t  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  show  that  the  Congregationalists,  unlike  the 
Presbyterians,  were  in  favor  of  religious  liberty,  from  the  fact  that  John  Cotton 
taught  that  some  of  the  members  of  the  Boston  congregations  believed  in  bishops 
as  church  officers.  See  Dexter's  "Congregationalism,"  p.  462. 

\  Felt's  "Ecclesiastical  Annals  of  New  England,"  ii.  138-141-143;  and  the 
"Magnalia,"  iii.  83. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxi 

elude  so,  since  a  change  of  scene  and  associations  is  ever 
liable  to  be  attended  by  sudden  changes  of  opinion.  The 
passage  from  an  old  country  to  a  new  one  is  always  at- 
tended with  hazard.  The  authorities  of  the  Roman  Church 
compute  the  number  of  defections  resulting  from  emigra- 
tion out  of  Europe  at  several  millions.  The  change  is  ac- 
complished by  means  of  a  violent  wrench,  which  prepares 
the  mind  for  the  acceptance  of  novel  views.  The  colonists 
of  Boston  and  Salem  also  received  encouragement  from  the 
people  at  Plymouth,  who,  at  the  end  of  ten  years  in  the 
new  world,  had  intensified  the  separatism  with  which  they 
originally  set  out,  though  they,  also,  at  the  beginning, 
professed  love  for  the  Church  of  England.  There  were 
indeed  those  who  endeavored  to  stem  the  tide.  The  Brown 
Brothers  at  Salem  sought  to  be  true  to  the  Church,  and 
inaugurated  worship  at  Salem,  according  to  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  which  they  supposed  would  obtain  in  the% 
Colony.  As  is  well  known,  they  were  banished  for  their  f 
zeal;  while  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bright,  who  at  Charlestown,  with  » 
the  aid  of  Blackstone,  began  to  put  the  church  system  in  \ 
working  order,  was  obliged  to  leave  the  country.*  Black— 
stone  himself  finally  went  to  Rhode  Island,  while  Wai- 
ford  was  banished,  and  Maverick  found  it  inexpedient  to 
contend  with  the  people,  who  abandoned  all  claim  to  the 
title  of  "  Puritan,"  and  became  Brownists.  in  principle. 

Attention  is  called  to  these  points  for  the  purpose  of 
indicating  the  fact  that  New  England  owes  her  origin  to 
the  Church.  The  company  holding  the  patent  of  the  coun- 
try was  composed  of  men  devoted  to  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and  the  colonists  of  1629  and  1630  would  not  have 
been  allowed  to  sail,  if  it  had  been  supposed  that  they 
would  have  proved  disloyal  to  their  own  principles;  yet  the 
defection  came.  Winthrop  himself  joined  the  standard  of 
the  men  who  revolted  against  him,  and  refused  the  ordi- 


*  Hubbard's  "New  England,"  p.  113;  and  Coit's  "Puritanism,"  p.  183,  an 
invaluable  book  in  all  these  connections. 


XX11 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 


nances  of  religion  until  he  engaged  heartily  in  the  rebellion. 
This  case  is  one  of  the  most  curious  in  ecclesiastical  annals. 

When  the  community  finally  settled  down  on  the  basis 
of  a  modified  Brownism,  toleration  was  not  thought  of; 
and,  ^lay  3d,  1631,  Walford,  the  Mishawum  Blacksmith, 
was  put  in  the  same  category  with  Alexander  the  Copper- 
smith, fancying  that  he  did  much  harm.  They  fined  him 
forty  shillings,  nominally  for  "  conterrfpt  of  authority,"  and 
ordered  him  and  his  wife  out  of  the  jurisdiction.*  Black- 
stone  left  Boston  in  1635  for  Rhode  Island,  of  which  state 
he  was  the  first  white  inhabitant.!  Maverick,  at  East  Bos- 
ton, struggled  long  with  the  authorities  and  was  fined  for 
petitioning  the  General  Court  for  religious  liberty.  The 
court  denounced  his  action  as  contemptuous.  At  last  he 
found  it  desirable  to  leave,  though  one  of  the  most  valuable 
and  substantial  members  of  the  community.]:  In  due  time, 
Morton,  of  Merry  Mount,  by  his  indiscretions,  provoked 
the  authorities  to  send  him  out  of  the  country. § 

Thus  churchmen  enjoyed  no  favor.     Intolerance  reigned 
within  the  limits  of  the  Massachusetts  government  until 
\   1662,  when   the  royal   proclamation  secured  some  liberty 
Uof  worship. 

In  the  New  Hampshire  Patent,  under  Mason,  a  church- 
man, religious  liberty  was  early  enjoyed;  and  when  Wal- 
ford went  thither,  in  1631,  the  services  of  the  Church  were 
inaugurated;  Richard  Gibson  being  the  minister  in  1638. 
In  1640  the  parish  was  organized,  being  the  first  regular 
organization  of  the  Church  known  to  have  been  effected 
in  New  England.  New  Hampshire  takes  the  precedence, 
while  Thomas  Walford,  the  despised  blacksmith,  appears 
as  the  first  New  England  church  warden,  holding  the  place 


*  Mass.  Records,  i.  pp.  86,  107,  243. 

t  Drake  says  that  Boston  will  yet  build  Blackstone's  monument. 

\  See  Drake's  "History  of  Boston,"  p.  296,  n. 

§  See  "New  English  Canaan,"  and  Bradford's  "History."  It  still  remains 
for  Massachusetts  to  do  justice  to  Morton,  who  had  his  faults,  though  he  was  not 
the  man  his  enemies,  and  notably  Bradford,  declared  him  to  be. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxiii 

of  Senior.*  St.  John's,  Portsmouth,  now  represents  the 
ancient  Church  of  "  Strawberry  Bank."  When,  however, 
New  Hampshire  was  annexed  to  Massachusetts  the  people 
were  oppressed.  The  Royal  Commissioners  came  to  the 
relief  of  those  who  had  been  denied  the  use  of  Common 
Prayer,  the  sacraments,  "decent  burial  of  the  dead,"  and 
the  rights  of  "  freemen."  t 

Boston  enjoys  the  second  place,  King's  Chapel  having 
been  organized  in  1682;  which  Mr.  Greenwood  fancied  the 
first  Episcopal  organization  in  New  England.^ 

We  must,  however,  leave  New  England  for  the  time  to 
consider  the  case  of  Virginia.  In  1607  the  work  of  colon- 
ization was  resumed,  an  expedition  sailing  from  the  Downs 
on  New  Year's  Day.  May  I3th  the  colonists  landed  at 
Jamestown,  where  the  settlement  was  commenced  and  a 
rude  church  built.  The  latter  consisted  simply  of  an  old  / 
sail  suspended  from  four  trees;  but  in  time  a  building  was  /A 
set  up  on  "  crachets,  covered  with  rafts,  sedge,  and  earth," 
a  sorry  defence  indeed  against  wind  and  weather.  Here, 
nevertheless,  daily  service  was  held,  with  two  sermons  on 
Sunday,  and  the  Holy  Communion  once  in  three  months, 
until  Mr.  Hunt  died.  This  worthy  man  was  the  main-stay 
of  the  colony.  He  was  sent  out  at  the  instance  of  Hakluyt. 
Smith  describes  him  as  an  "  honest,  religious,  and  coura- 


*  There  is  a  tablet  in  St.  Peter's  Church,  Salem,  Massachusetts,  claiming  that 
parish  as  "the  first  Episcopal  Society  gathered  in  New  England,"  which,  under 
God,  was  established  "in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1629."  This  notion  grew  out  of 
Nathaniel  Morton's  statement  concerning  the  Browns,  who,  in  1629,  "gathered  a 
company  together  in  a  distinct  place  from  the  public  Assembly  and  there  sundry 
times  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  read  to  such  as  resorted  thither."  All  this 
and  more  was  done  at  Sagadahoc  in  1607-8,  at  Weymouth  in  1623,  and  elsewhere; 
but  no  organization  is  mentioned  at  any  place,  and  much  less  at  Salem,  as  the 
Browns  were  sent  back  to  England  and  the  movement  suppressed. 

t  See  under  July,  1665,  "Calendar  of  State  Papers  for  America  and  the 
West  Indies,"  1661-8,  No.  1016,  p.  308;  also  the  "History  of  St.  John's, 
Portsmouth." 

\  See  the  title  page  of  his  "  History  of  King's  Chapel."  Also  page  179,  where 
the  people  themselves  were  in  error. 


xxiv  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

geous  divine,  during  whose  life  our  factions  were  oft  qualified, 
our  wants  and  extremities  so  comforted  that  they  seemed 
easy  in  comparison  of  what  we  endured  after  his  memor- 
able death."* 

After  the  death  of  Mr.  Hunt,  a  lay  reader  officiated; 
but,  in  1610,  Chaplain  Buck  came  from  the  Bermudas 
where,  with  Gates  and  Somers,  he  had  been  wrecked  in  the 
Sea  Adventure.  At  Bermuda  the  people  had  maintained 
daily  service,  all  being  obliged  to  attend,  Buck  having 
for  his  clerk  one  Stephen  Hopkins,  who  appears  to  have 
left  Virginia  soon  after  his  arrival  and  returned  to  Eng- 
land. He  came  out  to  Plymouth  in  the  "May  Flower"  in 
1620,  and  was  one  of  the  signers  of  the  Compact. t  Dur- 
ing Buck's  administration  Glover  was  alternate  preacher. 
Lord  Delaware  had  the  church  put  in  order,  with  a  walnut 
communion  table  and  cedar  pews.  A  font  was  hewed  out 
of  a  solid  log,  and  two  bells  placed  at  the  west  end  of  the 
church.  The  governor  also  caused  the  church  "  to  be  kept 
1 1  \j  I  passing  sweet,  and  trimmed  up  with  divers  flowers."  The 
•  •  '  governor  was  attended  at  church  by  a  guard  of  fifty  halber- 

diers, and  Secretary  Strachey  adorned  the  events  of  the 
period  with  his  scholarly  and  fluent  pen. 

The  Rev.  Alexander  Whittaker,  of  Henrico,  described 
as  the  "Apostle  of  Virginia"  and  as  "bearing  the  name  of 
God  to  the  Gentiles,"  was  one  of  the  early  clergy.     It  is 
a  very  curious  fact  that,  after  his  death,  the  Deputy  Gov- 
ernor,  Argall,  requested  Sir  Dudley  Digges  to  obtain  from 
the  Archbishop  a  permit  for  a  layman,  a  Mr.  Wickham,  to  , 
administer  the  "  sacrament,"  as  there  was  no  other  person  , 
to  officiate.     A  little  later  he  requests  "  ordination  for  Mr. 
Wickham,"  though  it  has  been  supposed  that  Mr.  Wick- 
ham,  who  officiated  until  he  became  blind,  never  had  any 


•  Smith's  "Advertisements,"  etc.,  1631.  See  also  Purchas  and  Anderson's 
"Colonial  Church." 

f  See  the  writer's  article  on  Hopkins  in  the  "  New-England  Historic  Genealog- 
•cal  Renter,"  July,  1878. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  XXV 

ordination.*  Mr.  Whittaker  baptized  the  Indian  girl,  Poco- 
hontas,  whose  name  is  connected  with  so  much  that  is 
apocryphal. 

The  Church  in  Virginia  at  this  period,  though  estab- 
lished, was  in  bondage,  being  governed  chiefly  by  the  head 
of  the  colony,  in  accordance  with  a  body  of  "Lawes  Divine,  | 
Morall  and  Martiall."     These  laws  are  said  to  have  been 
senT  to  Virginia  by~Sir  Thomas  Smythe  on  his  own  author- 
ity.    They  were  approved  by  Gates  and  West  in  1610,  and 
by  Dale  in  i6ii.t     Daily  service  was  enjoined,  according 
to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  the  clergy  were  held 
strictly  accountable  for  the  performance  of  their   duties. 
Profanity  and  blasphemy  were  to  be  punished  by  having 
"  a  bodkin  thrust  through  his  tongue "  in  the  second  in- 
stance, death  being  the  punishment  of  the  third,  as  in  New 
England,  in  16464     Disrespect  to  the  preacher  insured  to  //• 
the  offender  three,  pubTic  whippings.     Games  private  and 
public  were  prohibited  on  the  "  Sabboth,"  and  all  were  to  ^ 
prepare  by  "private  prayer,"  for  the  "  publique."     Services^/ 
were  held  twice  on  Sunday,  and  every  "man  and  woman" '7^ 
was  not  only  enjoined  to  hear  the  morning  sermon,  but 
also   in    the   afternoon    must   attend    "divine   service   and 
catechising  upon  pain  for  the  first  fault,  to  lose  their  pro- 
vision, and  allowance  for  the  whole  week  following,  for  the 
second  to  lose  the  said  allowance,  and  also  to  be  whipped, 
and  for  the  thjrd  to  suffer  death. "§ 

At  this  time  the  people  formed  a  co-operative  company, 
and  such  was  the  character  of  many  that  severe  laws  were 
required.  Still,  while  the  laws  contained  much  that  was 


*  See  MS.  quoted  in  Neill's  "English  Colonization  of  America,"  London,  1871, 
p.  62.  In  1623  Wyatt  said  that  there  were  ministers  in  the  colony  "not  in  orders." 
"  Calendar  of  State  Papers." 

t  They  were  edited,  and  evidently  compiled,  by  William  Strachey,  Secretary 
of  the  Colony,  and  were  printed  at  London  and  Oxford  in  1612.  The  work  is  re- 
printed in  Forces'  "Collections." 

|  Mass.  Colonial  Records,  vol.  ii.  p.  176. 

§  Force,  vol.  iii. 


xxvi  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

needed,  no  one  can  defend  them.  They  were  the  product 
of  a  severe  age,  when  human  life  was  not  valued,  and  when 
a  man  was  liable  to  be  hung  for  stealing  a  shilling.*  Dep- 
uty Governor  Argall,  in  1617,  also  decreed,  that  every  per- 
son should  attend  church  on  Sundays  and  Holy-days,  "or 
lye  neck  and  heels  that  night,  and  be  a  slave  to  the  colony 
the  following  week,"  and  for  the  third  offence  he  must  serve 
the  colony  a  year.  But  it  must  be  remembered,  however, 
that  these  laws  did  not  represent  the  people,  as  was  the  case 
with  the  laws  in  New  England.  Besides,  the  colony  was 
supposed  to  be  homogeneous.  These  laws  were  made  by 
churchmen  for  churchmen.  At  this  period,  Mr.  Whittaker 
is  supposed  to  have  written  as  follows:  "  But  I  much  more 
muse  that  so  few  of  our  English  ministers  that  were  so  hot 
against  Surplis  and  Subscription  come  hither  where  neither 
are  spoken  of."t  This  implies  that  some  of  the  class  re- 
ferred to  came  over,  while  Bancroft  says  that  Virginia 
was  "  a  place  of  refuge  even  for  Puritans,"  though  he  does 
not  state  his  authority.  It  is  clear  erfough,  however,  as 
taught  by  Whittaker,  that  even  these  Draconian  laws  did 
not  strike  at  Puritans,  but  were  aimed  at  a  vicious  class 
who  wanted  no  religion  at  all.  Captain  Edward  Brewster, 
son  of  William  of  Plymouth,  was  in  the  colony,  being 
known  as  a  Puritan.  He  conformed  in  1619.} 


hjmg  in  the  City  of  New  York  for  stealing  'sundry  articles,'  "New  York  Coll.," 


/  vl    s        *  As  late  as  1767,  in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  New  York,  a  sen-ant  girl  was 
+J  0   \      hj»ng  in  the  < 
1870,  p.  193. 

t  "Purchas  His  Pilgrimes,"  iv.  1770.  Neill  in  his  "Colonization,"  etc.,  p.  80, 
calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  Whittaker's  Letter,  in  Hamor's  Narrative,  does  not 
give  the  above  quotation.  He,  however,  says  in  his  Terra  Maria  (p.  75),  that  the 
"first  ships"  brought  "Puritan  families."  Dr.  Hawks  is  not  to  be  followed, 
where  he  says  that  there  were  no  Puritans.  It  is  absolutely  certain  that  John  Want, 
who  came  in  1610,  though  in  "his  owne  prayers  much  devout  and  frequent,"  was 
"hardly  drawne  to  the  publique  ";  and  that  he  was  suspected  even  as  a  Brownist 
when  on  the  way  over.  He  had  sympathizers,  and  Stephen  Hopkins,  evidently  a 
Puritan,  was  in  league  with  him.  Hopkins  even  conspired  against  Gates  at  Ber- 
muda, and  was  condemned  to  be  hung,  though  afterwards  pardoned.  It  would 
appear,  therefore,  that  Puritans  were  included  in  the  colony. 
\  Neill's  "Colonization,"  etc.,  p.  101. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxvii 

At  this  period  there  appear  to  have  been  five  so-called 
clergymen  in  Virginia,  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Whittaker,  Stock- 
ham,  Mease,  Bargran  and  Wickham,  though  there  may  be 
doubt  about  the  ordination  of  the  latter.*  For  their  main- 
tenance certain  lands,  money,  and  portions  of  tobacco  and 
corn  were  appropriated.  The  Bishop  of  London  undertook 
to  furnish  clergymen,  and  at  this  period  his  jurisdiction  i 
took  its  rise. 

In  1621,  under  Sir  George  Yeardley,  a  memorable  ap- 
proach to  constitutional  government  was  made  by  the 
colonial  assembly.  Such  was  the  success  of  the  colony, 
that  Bacon  compared  its  growth  to  that  of  a  mustard 
seed;  while  the  Spanish  Ambassador  in  England  feared 
that,  if  the  work  continued  to  succeed,  it  would  endanger 
the  Spanish  possessions  in  the  West  Indies  and  Mexico. 
At  this  period,  however,  the  people  of  Plymouth  were  in 
danger  of  starvation.  Fortunately  at  the  time  they  reached 
the  place  of  their  abode,  the  colonization  of  the  whole  coun- 
try had  been  resolved  upland  they  obtained  the  benefit 
of  the  general  determination. 

In  1629,  under  the  administration  of  Sir  John  Hervey, 
the  assembly  ordained  strict  conformity,  under  pains  and 
penalties. t     One  man  was  excommunicated  forty  days  "for 
using  scornful  speeches  and  putting*on  his  hat  in  church. "| 
While    Archbishop    Laud    was    in    power,    statutes    wereN 
framed  to  prevent    Nonconformists   from   coming  to  Vir-  ^ 
ginia.§     This   severity   only   served    to    excite    opposition' 
where  there  was  none,  and,  in  1642,  application  was  made 
to  the  people  of  Boston,  who  sent  three  ministers  to  Vir- 
ginia.    These  men  were  quickly  silenced,  though  Winthrop 
says  that  certain  people  resorted  to  them  in  private  houses.ll 
In  1648  there  were  one  hundred  and  eighteen  Dissenters 
in  Virginia.     Many  of  them  were  "  clapt  up  in  prison."* 


*  Stith's  "History  of  Virginia,"  p.  173.        \  Hening,  i.  149. 

\  Hening,  i.  223.  §  Beverly's  "History,"  p.  57. 

||  Savage's  "Winthrop,"  ii.  96.  IT  Hammond's  "  Leah  and  Rachael.' 


xxv 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 


£ 


' 


Under  Cromwell,  churchmen  in  turn  were  humiliated, 
though  their  services  were  tolerated,  and  Virginia  became 
a  refuge  for  persecuted  royalists.  In  1662,  under  Charles 
II.,  the  Church  was  re-established  by  law,  and  religious 

-  -  •— 

liberty  declared  for  all,  except  Quakers,  there  being  at 
this  time  about  fifty  parishes.  Under  the  second  James, 
there  was  great  uneasiness  respecting  popery;  but,  with 
the  accession  of  William  and  Mary,  confidence  was  re- 
stored. The  Rev.  Mr.  Temple  served  as  the  representa- 
tive of  the  Bishop  of  London  prior  to  1689,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  .Dr.  Blair,  who  was  appointed  the  commissary, 
being  empowered  to  visit  the  parishes,  deliver  charges,  and 
in  some  cases  to  administer  discipline.  He  was  eminently  ] 
useful,  and  founded  the  college  of  William  and  Mary.  In 
the  year  1700,  Virginia  revealed  a  kindly  spirit,  receiving 
the  French  Protestant  refugees  and  exempting  them  from 
taxation.  In  1722,  the  inhabitants  were  almost  exclusively 
members  of  the  Church  of  England.  In  1731,  Presbyteri- 
anism  was  introduced,  and  in  1740,  Whitfield  appeared  as 
a^clergyman  of  the  Church.  About  1765,  the  Baptists 
came.  In  I77i,  the  commissary,  the  JKev.  Mr.  Camm, 
called  severaTmeetings  of  the  clergy  to  address  the  King 
in  behalf  of  an  American  Episcopate.  The  more  than 
one  hundred  churchai  of  the  colony  were  thinly  repre- 
*  sented;  but  finally  the  clergy  agreed  to  address  the  Bishop 
of  London,  instead  of  the  King.  There  was  opposition  also 
to  the  immediate  establishment  of  Episcopacy,  and,  though 
the  legislature  favored  the  movement,  it  failed.  In  1772, 
the  Methodists  began  to  preach  in  Virginia;  and  in  J7^6»  the 
Church  was  disestablished  by  the  legislature;  though  the 
Methodists  stoiocT  by"  the  Church,  opposing  disestablish- 
nient.  Then  followed  the  period  of  depression,  which  pre- 
vailed at  the  time  when  the  case  of  Virginia  is  taken  up 
in  the  narrative  of  Bishop  White.*  May  i8th,  1785,  the 


•  On  this  entire  period,  see  Hawks'  "Virginia,"  pp.  1-179. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxix 

first  Convention  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  assem-  /^  Q^. 
bled,  thirty-^six  of  the  clergy  and  seventy-one  laymen  meet-        *      / 
ing  at  Richmond.     There  is  much  in  the  colonial  history  of  \j  O 
Virginia  to  mortify  churchmen,  and  the  short-comings  of 
their  own  brethren  at  that  period  should  serve  to  moderate 
the  severity  of  their  judgment  of  non-conformists. 

Before  returning  to  the  subject  of  the  Church  in  New 
England,  it  will  be  necessary  to.  trace  the  origin  and 
growth  of  the  Church  in  the  Middle  and  Southern  States. 

With  respect  to  New  York,  it  appears  that  the  first  per- 
manent agricultural  colony  was  undertaken  by  the  Dutch  // 
in  1623,*  who  maintained  the  ascendency  until  1664.     Dur-    . 
ing  the  Dutch  rule,  religious  freedom  prevailed,  and  Father    ^iJ^L    ff^ 
Jogues  the  Jesuit  was  hospitably  received  when  in  distress.   ^ 
Dutch  toleration,  in  theory,  nevertheless  was  designed  for   l-f(t 
"  Calvinists."t     In  the  year  1700,  a  law  was  passed  against 
Jesuits  alrid  all  Roman  Catholic  Ecclesiastics,  and  against 
those  who  harbored  them.:}:     Still  Romanists  were  entitled 
to  the  private  enjoyment  of  their  opinions,  their  public  ser- 
vices  not   being   rendered    legal   until    the   period   of  the 
Revolution. 

In  1664,  the  Dutch  surrendered  to  the  English,  and  there- 
after the  British  army  chaplains  were  accustomed  to  hold 
services  in  the  fort  at  the  battery,  occupying  the  chapel 
in  common  with  the  Dutch.  The  latter,  by  the  terms  of 
surrender,  were  guaranteed  "  Liberty  of  their  consciences 
in  divine  worship  and  church  discipline";  but  Protestants 
alone  were  allowed  to  hold  services.  "  Indian  powawow- 
ing  and  devil  worship,"  were  nevertheless  forbidden.  Gov- 
ernor Nicolls  in  1665,  and  Lovelace  in  1670,  levied  taxes 
for  the  support  of  a  minister  in  each  town,  who  was  to  be 
selected  by  a  majority  of  the  people,  who,  of  course,  were 
Dutch.  In  1683-4,  the  Duke  of  York,  a  Roman  Catholic, 


*  Brodhead's  "History  of  New  York,"  i.  p.  150. 

t  Brodhead's  "New  York,"  i.  p.  374. 

t  See  Bradford's  edition  of  the  Laws  of  New  York,  1710,  p.  37. 


xxx  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

made  ample  provision  "for  liberty  of  conscience  to  all 
Christians,  and  provided  also  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
ministry  of  all  Christian  Churches."  In  this  the  Duke  was 
strictly  impartial,  and  under  his  successor,  Dongan,  the 
same  policy  was  continued.  The  Lutheran,  Dutch  and 
French  religious  societies  were  equally  free  from  taxation. 
,  In  1683,  the  Assembly  had  reaffirmed  the  Duke's  policy; 
and  in  1691,  an  act  was  proposed  for  "settling  the  min- 
istry." This  work,  however,  was  not  completed  until  1693, 
during  the  administration  of  Governor  Fletcher.  Under  this 
act,  freeholders  were  to  elect  two  church  wardens  and  ten 
vestrymen,  who  were  to  levy  taxes  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  ministry  and  the  poor  of  their  respective  places, 
though  these  officers  were  not  wardens  and  vestrymen 
in  the  Episcopal  sense.*  Nevertheless  the  Church  party 
considered  it  a  partial  victory;  though  it  is  argued,  that  as 
the  Assembly  contained  but  a  single  churchman,  the  act  was 
not  intended  for  the  sole  benefit  of  an  Episcopal  establish- 
ment. Accordingly,  in  New  York,  Feb.  I2th,  1694,  the 
majority  of  the  wardens  and  vestry  voted  that  the  minis- 
ter should  be  a  Dissenting  minister,  while  three  days  after, 
the  Rev.  John  Miller,  though  licensed  by  the  Bishop  of 
London  was  refused  the  benefit  of  the  act  by  the  council. 
Nothing  was  done  until  January  ipth,  1695,  when  the  war- 
dens and  vestry  elected  "  Mr.  William  Vesey,"  who  appears 
to  have  been  elected  by  Dissenters.  The  Governor  declared 
that  the  establishment  of  Dissenters  was  a  contravention 
of  the  act,  though  the  Assembly  had  maintained  the  con- 
trary. Two  years,  therefore,  passed  before  the  matter  was 
adjusted.  March  I9th,  1696,  ten  members  of  the  Church 
,  -/t°f  England,  several  of  whom  were  "vestrymen"  of  New 
York,  were  granted  leave  to  purchase  a  piece  of  land 
for  a  church,  and  July  23d,  they  were  authorized  to  col- 
lect funds  and  commence  building.  These  men  appear  to 
have  acted  for  the  "  Managers  of  the  Affairs  of  the  Church 

•  Jones's  "  History  of  New  York,  "  ii.  395. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxxi 

of  England  in  the  City  of  New  York,"  a  body  in  existence 
in  1693.  Next,  November  2d,  1696, . "  Mr.  William  Veazy" 
appeared  before  the  wardens  and  vestry,  accepted  an  elec- 
tion, and  agreed  to  go  to  England  to  obtain  orders  and 
return  at  the  first  opportunity.  Mr.  Veasey  now  appears  to 
have  changed  his  views,  some  said  with  unworthy  motives, 
and  passed  from  the  Presbyterian  to  the  Episcopal  ranks. 
Money  was  raised  for  his  travelling  expenses,  and  he  went 
to  England  and  was  ordained.  In  1697,  the  Church  war- 
dens continued  in  the  interests  of  Episcopacy;  and  in  the  /  /  ^  •/  ^ 
same  year  an  act  was  passed  by  the  Assembly,  assigning 
to  the  rector  of  Trinity  Parish,  New  York,  and  his  sue-  . 
cessors  all  the  benefit  that  was  intended  by  the  act  of  1^93-  / 
In  this  manner  was  the  Church  of  England  established  in 
New  York,  if  it  was  established.*  Missionaries  soon  began 
to  come  over. 

In  1701  the  Propagation  Society  commenced  its  work, 
when  an  address  forwarded  to  the  managers  showed  that 
neither  in  the  province  of  New  York  nor  on  Long  Island, 
was  there  any  "Church  of  England. "t  Nevertheless  the 
French  Church  received  some  help  from  Mr.  Veasey  j  and 
the  Ministry  Act  was  interpreted  in  their  favor.  It  has  been 
mournfully  said,  "  that  the  period  of  religious  freedom " 
closed  with  the  previous  century.  The  Church  had  indeed 
been  put  in  power,  but  things  were  not  so  bad  as  some 
have  represented.  Dissenters  were  not  treated  with  more 
rudeness  than  were  churchmen  themselves  under  Lord  Corn- 
bury,  who,  however,  behaved  badly  towards  the  Presbyte- 


*  On  this  subject,  see  the  very  carefully  prepared  articles  in  the  "  Historical 
Magazine,"  June  and  July,  1867,  by  George  H.  Moore,  LL.D.,  who  maintains  that 
the  Act  of  1793  was  intended  to  apply  to  all  denominations  alike,  and  that  it  was 
"arbitrarily  and  illegally  wrested  from  its  true  bearings  and  made  to  answer  the 
purpose  of  the  English  Church  party."  See  also  Dr.  Baird's  article  on  the  "  Status 
of  the  Presbyterians,"  etc.,  "Mag.  of  Amer.  Hist.,"  1878,  vol.  iii.,  p.  597,  which 
gives  a  distinctly  Presbytenan  view. 

t  Coll.  Prot.  Epis.  Hist.  Society,  p.  xiii. 

\  Doc.  Hist.  N.  York,  ii.,  p.  68,  on  the  "State  of  Religion,"  1657-1712. 


xxxii  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

rian  minister  at  Jamaica,  where  the  people  were  divided 
about  the  title  to  the  church  building.* 

In  1704  an  act  was  passed  to  raise  one  hundred  pounds 
annually  for  the  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  while  the  Min- 
istry Act  was  continued  down  to  1784,  when  it  was  abol- 
ished, and  Episcopacy  lost  the  peculiar  privileges  formerly 
possessed.  During  the  continuance  of  the  act,  under  Lord 
Cornbury,  several  Presbyterians  were  annoyed.  In  1707 
Makemie  and  Hampton  were  arrested  as  strolling  preach- 
ers; but  churchmen,  like  Moore  and  Brooks,  were  also  pro- 
ceeded against  as  having  no  proper  authority  for  the  exer- 
cise of  their  vocation.  The  people,  however,  universally 
disapproved  of  Cornbury's  arbitrary  proceedings.  Church- 
men were  in  the  minority,  though  the  law  was  on  their 
side;  and  when  the  Presbyterians  organized  they  proved  ;< 
pushing  people,  incessantly  laboring  to  circumvent  the 
Episcopalians,  who,  upon  the  whole,  could  show  a  toler- 
ably fair  bill  of  grievances. t 

The  Church  grew  slowly  in  the  colony  of  New  York, 
and  when  the  Revolution  dawned  became  more  or  less  dis- 
organized. When,  in  1776,  the  British  evacuated  New  York 
City,  Inglis,  of  Trinity  Church,  remained,  continuing  in  a 
firm,  if  not  defiant  manner,  to  pray  for  the  King.  This  was 
finally  put  an  end  to  by  the  soldiers.  In  1783  the  property 
of  Trinity  was  committed  to  the  care  of  a  board  of  nine 
responsible  trustees.:}:  In  1784  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Bloomer, 
Moore,  and  others  were  on  the  ground  to  join  in  the  re- 
organization of  the  Church  at  large. 

Maryland  was  colonized  by  Calvert,  known  as  Lord 
Baltimore,  who  arrived  March  25th,  1634,  the  majority 


•  Smith's  "New  York,"  i.  148. 

t  Jones's  "History  of  New  York,"  i.  2-8,  and  ii.  p.  389.  The  partisan  his- 
tory of  Jones  would  make  it  appear  that  the  Revolution  was  precipitated  by  the 
Presbyterians.  There  are  statements  on  record  which  show  that  distinguished  prel- 
ates at  home  did  not  consider  the  Church  in  New  York  as  established,  and  various 
opinions  prevail  concerning  the  exact  status  of  the  Church. 

\  New  York.  Coll.,  1870,  p.  320. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxxiii 

of  the  people  being  Protestants,  while  the  leaders  were 
Roman  Catholics.  Religious  liberty,  was  proclaimed,  and 
the  Church  of  England  was  protected.  Father  White,  a 
Jesuit,  stood  at  the  head  of  his  co-religionists,  but  he  en- 
joyed no  special  favor.  The  Puritans  were  invited  by  Lord 
Baltimore  to  become  a  part  of  this  happy  family.  In  1648, 
trie  lieutenant  governor  was  obliged  to  take  oath  not  to 
trouble  or  molest  any  believer  in  Jesus  Christ  on  account 
of  his  religion.*  Under  Cromwell,  Maryland  was  seized  , 
by  the  Protestants,  and  Roman  Catholics  were  disenabled 
from  voting.  In  i6cji^  Maryland  was  made  a  royal  colony,  •  /i f 

when  the  Assemblyestablished  the  Church  of  "England; 
imposing  a  tax  of  forty  pounds  of  tobacco  on  each  person 
to  create  a  fund  for  building  and  repairing  churches.f  At 
that  time,  according  to  some,  there  were  sixteen,  and  ac- 
cording to  others,  three  clergymen  in  the  colony.^  In 
1695  Dr.  Bray  was  made  commissary.  In  1714  the  Church 
was  in""a  very  depressed  condition. §  In  1716  Wilkins  and 
Henderson  were  appointed  commissaries,  and  in  1720  the 
Bishop  of  London  did  something  towards  reviving  the 
Church.  At  his  suggestion,  Mr.  Colebatch  was  nominated  , 
by  the  clergy  as  Suffragan  Bishop,  upon  which  an  act  was  .• 
passed  by  the  legislature,  then  more  or  less  hostile,  to  pre- 
vent the  candidate  from  leaving  the  colony.  Thus  the 
scheme  failed.  The  legislature  still  continuing  inimical, 
Bishop  Gibson,  the  Bishop  of  London,  became  inactive, II 
and  Henderson  ceased  acting  as  commissary.  The  Roman 
Catholics  now  revived,  and  the  Baptists  were  active.  In 
1763,  the  legislature,  weary  of  the  irregularities  that  char- 
acterized many  of  the  "clergy,  reduced  their  salaries;  and, 
in  1769,  Governor  Eden  ordered  that  the  clergy  should  no 
longer  meet  together  to  act  on  matters  connected  with  the 
Church,  declaring  that  they  were  beyond  the  control  of  any 


*  Bancroft,  i.  193.  f  Anderson,  ii.  620. 

J  See  Griffiths  and  Hawks.  §  Anderson,  iii.  284. 

||  Anderson,  iii.  303. 


XXXiv  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

bishop.*  When  the  Revolution  approached,  the  Church  in 
Maryland  experienced  the  same  evils  that  overtook  co-re- 
ligionists in  other  colonies.  The  Rev.  Jonathan  Boucher 
I  and  a  third  of  the  clergy  sided  with  the  Crown.  Ulti- 
mately, quite  all  the  churches  were  closed,  and  the  clergy, 
for  the  most  part,  left  the  country.  After  the  Revolution 
the  legislature  secured  to  the  church  the  properties  pre- 
viously held.f 

The  Church  of  Sweden  was  first  upon  the  ground  in 
Pennsylvania,  and  about  1646  the  Rev.  Mr.  Printz  built  a 
church  at  Tinicum.  In  1657,  Borell  was  made  Provost.  In 
1677  the  Block  House  was  'built  on  the  site  now  occupied 
by  the  Gloria  Dei  Church. £  It  was  used  for  public  wor- 
ship. In  1681  Penn  obtained  his  charter,  which  stipulated 
that  any  of  the  inhabitants  desiring  the  services  of  the 
Church  of  England  should  be  entitled  to  a  minister  or 
ministers  approved  by  the  Bishop  of  London.  In 
Christ  Church,  Philadelphia,  was  built,  and  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Clayton  was  appointed  minister.  In  the  year  1700  Mr. 
Evans  was  sent  out;  and,  in  1702,  Keith  and  Talb<>t  ar- 
rived. In  1707  Mr.  Rudman,  of  the  Swedish  Church,  served 
Christ  Church,  the  regular  minister  being  absent.  In  1711, 
while  Christ  Church  was  being  enlarged,  the  congregation 
worshipped  in  Gloria  Dei  Church,  and  Swedish  hymns  were 
sung  in  the  service.  Later,  the  Propagation  Society  made 
an  appropriation  for  the  Swedish  ministers  who  served  va- 
cant English  Churches.  In  1712,  it  is  said,  the  "  Surplice  " 
was  first  mentioned  at  Christ  Church.  In  1716  Rev.  Mr. 
Evans  was  made  minister  at  Oxford  and  Radnor,  in  addi- 
tion to  his  duties  at  Christ  Church,  of  which  he  was  rector 
seventeen  years.  In  1724  the  congregation  invited  Dr. 
Richard  Welton,  of  Burlington,  to  take  charge  of  Christ 


*  Anderson,  iii.  310. 
t  See  Hawks'  "Maryland." 

J  On  the  Welsh  Episcopalians  who  entered  Pennsylvania,  see  Day's  "Penn. 
Hist.  Coll.,"  p.  484. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxxv 

Church.  It  has  been  stated  that  this  person  was  conse- 
crated a  bishop  by  the  Nonjurors,  but  the  case  appears 
dubious.  In  1750  Christopher  Gist  went  through  Western 
Pennsylvania  as  an  explorer  and  did  something  to  call  at- 
tention to  church  services.  In  1731  there  appear  to  have 
been  about  seven  clergymen  in  the  colony,  of  whom  five 
were  missionaries  of  the  Propagation  Society.  In  1760  a 
Convention  of  the  Clergy  was  held  in  Philadelphia,  and 
missionary  reports  were  read.  Dr.  Jenney,  Dr.  William 
Smith  and  seven  other  Pennsylvania  clergy  were  present. 
Irf  1763  Whitfield  preached  in  Christ  Church.  In  1770,  the 
last  Swedish  missionary,  the  Rev.  Nicholas  Collin,  of  Upsal, 
came  over  to  Gloria  Dei  Church;  and,  eventually,  the  f 
Swedes  became  a  part  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  ' 
In  1772  the  Rev.  William  White  commenced  his  labors  in  /  V  7 
Philadelphia  as  deacon  at  Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's. 
December  3d,  1775,  Mr.  White  was  elected  chaplain  to  the 
Continental  Congress,  and  the  members  of  the  Church  in 
Philadelphia  entered  heartily  upon  the  work  of  achieving 
American  Independence.  July  4th,  1776,  it  was  resolved, 
at  the  house  of  Mr.  Duche,  to  omit  the  prayer  for  the  King.  •» 
April  1 5th,  1779,  Mr.  White  was  elected  rector  of  Christ 
Church  and  St.  Peter's.  The  Church  struggled  on  through 
the  Revolution;  and,  November,  1783,  with  Drs.  Morgan 
and  Blackwell,  he  took  measures  which  led  to  the  Primary 
Convention  of  May  24th,  1784.*  This  convention  was  at-  /  y 
tended  by  about  twenty-five  delegates  from  sixteen  par- 
ishes. Six  principles  were  drawn  up  and  recommended.f 

In   North  Carolina  religious  liberty  prevailed  from  the       ftf  k 
outset,  and  the  first  movement  to  plant  the  Church  was 
that  of  Dr.  Bray,  Commissary  of  Maryland,  who,  in  1692, 
brought  the  subject  to  the  notice  of  the  Bishop  of  London. 

*  On  Pennsylvania,  see  the  "Churchman's  Calendar,"  1866,  p.  129.  The 
"Pennsylvania  Papers," pa ssim. 

t  These  may  be  found  on  page  92  of  the  Memoirs.  They  were  printed  on  a 
broadside  with  a  preamble,  the  names  of  the  delegates  being  appended.  The  editor 
at  present  knows  of  only  one  copy  of  this  broadside. 


XXXvi  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

In  1701,  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  sent 
out  the  Rev.  Daniel  Brett,  though  within  a  year  he  disap- 
peared under  scandalous  circumstances.  The  first  church 
appears  to  have  been  built  in  1702,*  and  the  Church  of 
England  was  established Jjy  law,  though  not  without  oppo- 
sition. In  1703-4  Mr.  Blair  went  out  as  missionary,  but, 
after  a  severe  struggle,  the  opposition  induced  him  to  re- 
turn. Messrs.  Adams  and  Gordon  followed  in  1708.  In 
1710  Mr.  Adams  died,  and  Gordon  went  back  to  England, 
being  unable  to  endure  the  opposition  excited,  chiefly  by 
Quakers,  though  North  Carolina  had  always  proved  more 
or  less  irreligious.  The  Rev.  John  Urmston  came  over  in 
1711.  He  was  unaimable,  quarrelsome  and  covetous.  He 
administered  the  Communion  but  twice  in  five  years,  and 
was  punished  by  the  court  for  drunkenness  and  profanity. 
Like  scores  of  similar  men  in  the  colonies,  he  was  a  dis- 
grace to  Christianity.t  The  Rev.  Mr.  Rainsford  was  of 
good  character,  but  had  no  zeal.  One  of  his  successors, 
Taylor,  was  murdered  for  his  money.  In  1722  Mr.  New- 
man came  out,  but  the  colony  was  unpopular  with  the 
clergy.  In  1725  Blacknall  appeared,  and  on  one  occasion 
informed  agjainst  himself,  with  respect  to  an  illegal  mar- 
riage, to  get  one  half  of  the  fifty  pounds  due  to  an  informer. 
Others  followed  who  shed  almost  equal  credit  upon  the 
Church,  yet,  notwithstanding  such  scarraals,  her  strength  \ 
gradually  increased. 

In  New  Jersey  the  proprietary  government  was  kindly 
to  all  denominations  of  Christians.  About  1695  some  of 
the  East  Jersey  proprietors  addressed  Compton,  Bishop  of 
London,  requesting  the  services  of  the  Church;  and  the 
Rev.  Edward  Perthuck  was  sent  over  near  the  close  of 
1698.  He  commenced  services  at  Perth  Amboy,  though 
he  did  not  remain  permanently.  Queen  Anne's  instruc- 


*  Hawks'  "North  Carolina,"  ii.  341. 

t  Dorr's  "History  of  Christ  Church,  Philadelphia,"  p.  51.    Urmston  served  in 
PhiladelpTiia  for  a  while,  but  was  dismissed  in  disgrace. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxxvii 

tions  to  Lord  Cornbury,  in  1702,  enjoined  the  maintenance 
of  worship  and  the  sacraments  according  to  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  ordered  the  building  of  churches  and  a 
provision  for  the  maintenance  of  the  clergy.  He  was  to 
prefer  none  who  could  not  produce  the  certificate  of  the 
Bishop  of  London.  Accordingly  he  proceeded  against  va- 
rious clergymen  who  officiated  contrary  to  law;  and  the 
Assembly  of  New  Jersey,  Oct.  24,  1707,  reproached  him 
in  their  address,  because  one  minister  of  the  Church  of 
England  was  "dragged  by  a  sheriff  from  Burlington  to  Am- 
boy"  and  afterwards  confined  like  a  malefactor  in  "another 
government."  * 

In  1732  the  Rev.  George  Keith  came  out,  and  the  Rev. 
John  Talbot  was  associated  with  him.  Through  their  ef- 
forts a  church  was  gathered  at  Burlington,  the  present  St. 
Mary's.  In  1704  Mr.  Brook  was  missionary  at  Elizabeth- 
town,  and  Vaughn  in  1709,  with  Halliday,  in  1711.  Perth 
Amboy  lost  some  of  its  importance  when  the  governor 
moved  to  Trenton.  The  history  of  the  Church  at  Amboy 
gives  a  fair  idea  of  the  progress  made  elsewhere. t  St. 
Mary's,  Burlington,  also  serves  a  similar  purpose,  exhibit- 
ing the  career  of  Talbot, £  though  there  appears  to  be  no 

*  Smith's  "New  Jersey,"  333. 

t  See  Whitehead's  "Early  History  of  Perth  Amboy,"  p.  208. 

\  "History  of  the  Church  in  Burlington,"  by  the  Rev.  George  M.  Hills, 
D.D.,  1876.  The  theory  of  Talbot's  "Episcopal  Consecration"  is  there  set  forth 
(p.  168);  and  again  by  Dr.  Hills  in  the  "Pennsylvania  Magazine,"  vol.  iii.  p.  32. 
See  the  "Living  Church,"  Chicago,  April  igth,  1879,  p.  439.  The  charge  that 
Talbot  demanded  Episcopal  obedience  seems  to  rest  chiefly  upon  the  authority  of 
the  profligate  Urmston.  "Pennsylvania  Papers,"  p.  143.  Dr.  Hawks  ("Mary- 
land," p.  183)  thinks  that  there  is  "no  doubt"  about  the  consecration  of  Welton 
find  Talbot,  but  how  far  he  had  examined  the  subject  we  can  not  say.  See  also 
Anderson's  "Colonial  Church,"  iii.  p.  351.  See  Bishop  White's  "Story"  in  this 
connection  in  Hawks'  "Maryland,"  p.  185.  The  consecration  of  Wellon  and 
Talbot  was  the  subject  of  rumor,  but  the  authority  offered  in  its  support  is  Per- 
ceval, in  his  "Apology  for  Apostolical  Succession"  (second  ed.,  p.  247),  who 
drew  his  information,  partly  from  some  curious  printed  documents,  and  partly  from 
information  furnished  by  two  clergymen  not  adherents  of  the  nonjurors.  But  what 
were  the  pamphlets  and  who  were  the  men  ?  If  the  information  was  reliable,  why 
did  he  withhold  essential  points  ? 


xxxviii  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

evidence  that  the  Church  can  accept  of  the  Episcopal 
character  claimed  for  him.  He  never  performed  any  Epis- 
copal act,  and  he  denied  that  he  ever  attempted  to  exer- 
cise any  supervision  of  his  brethren. 

In  Delaware,  as  in  Pennsylvania,  the  Swedish  Church 
appeared  first,  colonizing  the  west  side  of  the  Delaware 
in  1636-7.  In  1703  Keith  visited  Delaware,  and  in  1704 
the  Rev.  Thomas  Crawford  was  sent  over  as  a  missionary 
by  the  Propagation  Society.  In  1726  there  were  four 
churches.  In  1792  the  Swedes  were  merged  in  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church.* 

Georgia  was  colonized  by  Oglethorpe  in  1733,  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  and  many  of  the  clergy  of  England 
making  contributions  in  aid  of  the  work.     The  Rev.  Dr. 
Herbert  came  as  missionary,  and  brought  a  quantity  of 
religious  books  contributed  by  friends.     The  Rev.  Samuel 
Wesley  gave  a  chalice  and  patine.     Herbert  was  succeeded 
by  Channey,  and   the   latter   by  the   Rev.   John  Wesley, 
who  reached  Georgia  in  February,   1736,  accompanied  by 
his  brother  Charles,  who  was  secretary  and  chaplain   to 
Oglethorpe.     John  Wesley  was  at  this  time  a  very  rigid! 
churchman,    and    his   views   of   duty   finally   brought   him/ 
into  collision  with  some  of  the  people.     This   led  to  his\ 
flight  from  the  colony,  where  he  and  his  brother  had  been  j 
treated  in  the  most   outrageous   manner.     George   Whit-/ 
field  came  out  in    1737,   and   founded  an  Orphan  House, 
Norris   being   a   co-worker   with   Whitfield.     The    Church' 
grew,  and,  in  1758,  was  established  by  law. 

When  the  Revolution  dawned,  Georgia  had  but  few 
settled  clergymen.  Some  of  these  took  sides  with  the 
Crown  and  left  the  country.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  the 
legislature,  however,  after  the  war,  was  to  recommend 
measures  to  maintain  public  worship.f 


*  See  Diocese  of  Delaware,  in  "Churchman's  Calendar,"  1865,  p.  118,  and  the 
Delaware  "  Church  Papers,"  passim. 

\  See  Bishop  Stevens'  "  History  of  Georgia,"  Philadelphia,  1859. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xxxix 

Returning  to  New  England,  we  commence  with  the 
case  of  Rhode  Island.  The  first  white  man  who  estab- 
lished a  permanent  home  in  Rhode  Island,  was  the  Rev. 
William  Blackstone,  who,  as  we  have  already  seen,  left 
Boston  in  the  spring  of  1635,  an<^  to°^  ms  wav  mto  tne 
wilderness,  eventually  selecting  for  his  abode  a  place  called 
"  Study  Hill,"  on  the  banks  of  the  Blackstone  River,  and 
now  included  within  the  boundary  of  Attleborough,  Mas- 
sachusetts. Anticipating  Roger  Williams  as  a  colonist  in 
Rhode  Island,  he  excelled  that  stern  man  in  gentleness 
of  manners  and  sobriety  of  speech.  Williams,  who  is  held 
up  as  a  pattern  respecting  religious  toleration,  denounced 
the  hearing  of  the  Church  of  England  clergy  as  sinful;  but  / 
Blackslone  was  kindly  to  all,  and  may  even  be  regarded 
as  the  founder  of  Rhode  Island.  At  "  Study  Hill  "  he  was 
something  of  a  recluse,  but  it  is  known  that  he  exercised 
his  vocation,  and  occasionally  preached  in  Providence, 
where  he  was  the  first  representative  of  the  Church  of 
England.*  Prior  to  1700  some  families  attached  to  the 
Church  settled  in  Narragansett  County.  They  worshipped 
in  private  houses  until  1706,  when  the  Rev.  Christopher 
Bridge  became  their  minister.  McSparran  says  that  he 
officiated  in  a  little  church  at  Newport  in  1707.  In  1717 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Grey,  of  the  Propagation  Society,  officiated 
in  Narragansett.  The  first  church  record  commences  April 
I4th,  1718.  In  1730  the  Attorney  General,  Updike,  was 
baptized  in  the  Petaquamscut  River,  by  immersion,  Mr. 
McSparran  officiating.  This  clergyman  served  the  Church 
in  Rhode  Island  until  1757.  The  advent  of  Dean  Berkley,  I  [*)  V* 
however,  constituted  a  great  feature  in  the  Colonial  His- 

i  tory  of  the  Church  in  Rhode  Island.     He  reached  Newport 
in    1729,  and  left  in   1731,  but  his  visit  produced  marked 

;   resuTfsT     His  donations"~"of  books  to  the  libraries  of  Yale 

*  The  "History  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Narragansett,"  compiled  by  order 
of  the  Diocesan  Convention,  does  not  even  contain  the  name  of  Blackstone,  a  mem- 
orable oversight.  See  Bliss'  "History  of  Rehoboth,"  pp.  2-14,  and  Newman's 
"Address,"  Pawtucket,  1855. 


Xl  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

and  Harvard  proved  very  important,  and  the  weight  of  his 
character  was  felt  for  a  long  period.*  Mr.  Fayerweather, 
the  successor  of  McSparran,  labored  with  good  results; 
though,  having  his  scruples,  he  sided  with  the  King  when 
the  Revolution  dawned,  and  his  church  was  closed.  The 
last  record  made  by  him  was  dated  November  6th,  1774. 
He  died  in  1781.  Toleration  prevailed  in  Rhode  Island, 
yet  in  1722-3,  in  Bristol,  twelve  churchmen  were  impris- 
oned by  the  Connecticut  authorities  for  refusing  to  pay 
dues  for  the  support  of  the  non-episcopal  minister,  Mr. 
Nathaniel  Cotton.  In  1775,  the  Propagation  Society  main- 
tained three  or  four  clergymen  and  a  schoolmaster  in  Rhode 
Island,  and  they  struggled  on  through  the  Revolution,  but 
at  its  close  the  Church  was  very  feeble. t 

The  Connecticut  Congregationalists  formed  a  com- 
pact body  in  church  and  state;  but,  in  1665,  the  Royal 
Commissioners  were  assured  that  the  local  authorities 
would  not  interfere  with  those  who  might  desire  to 
maintain  public  services,  according  to  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer.  It  was  not,  however,  until  1708  that  the 
"Act  of  Toleration"  was  passed.  Nevertheless  at  Strat- 
ford, in  1690,  there  were  a  few  churchmen.  When  Keith 
and  Talbot  came  over  as  missionaries,  curiously  enough, 
they  were  entertained  by  the  Congregational  minister  at 
New  London,  who  spoke  kindly  of  the  Church,  and  treated 
them  with  much  civility.  In  1705  Mr.  Muirspn  settled  at 
Rye,  then  in  Connecticut,  and  in  1706,  he  went  with  Col- 
onel Heathcote  to  Stratford  on  a  missionary  tour,  where  a 
local  officer  stood  in  the  highway  and  threatened  them 
with  a  "fine  of  five  pounds."  Mr.  Muirson,  died  in  1708. 
From  this  time  the  work  went  on  with  great  success,  and, 
in  1722,  President  Cutler  of  Yale  College,  and  six  others, 

f\  S       I  ""   '  *          ***™T* 

;    assembled   in    the  College   Library,  declared   for  Episco- 


*  Anderson's  "Colonial  Church,"  iii.  371. 

t  See  "  Narragansett  Church,"  passim,  and  the  "Torrey  Papers  of  the  Prince 
Library,"  in  the  Boston  Public  Library. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHUKCH.  xli 

pacy,  having  been  led  to  this  course  by  the  study  of  books 
which  they  found  upon  the  shelves.  The  community  was 
astounded,  but  the  Congregationalists  could  not  undo  the 
work.  The  axe  had  been  laid  at  the  root  of  the  tree. 
Cutler,  Johnson  and  Brown  embarked  for  England,  and 
re~ceived  Orders.  With' the  growth  of  the  Church  a  cor- 
responding  increase  of  hostility  was  developed.  In  1742 
there  were  "  fourteen  churches  built  or  b"uiTHing  and  seven 
clergymen,"  the  Rev.  Roger  Price,  as  commissary  for  New 
England,  supervising  the  work.  At  this  period  Whitfield 
introduced  an  element  j)f  jdiscord,  but  in  1747,  the  undue 
excitement  was  followed  by  corresponding  depression. 

About  the  year  1763,  Mayhew  and  others  of  Boston  /Hy 
commenced  the  discussion  of  Episcopacy,  and  were  re-  / 
plied  to  by  Archbishop  Seeker,  who  showed  clearly  that 
the  system  was  not  aimed,  as  the  Congregationalists 
taught,  at  the  subversion  of  popular  rights.  As  early  as 
1766,  twelve  of  tfie  clergy,  assembled  at  Stratford,  and 
addressed  the  Bishop  of  London  in  favor  of  the  Episco- 
pate. They  did  so  again  in  1771.  In  1774,  the  report  of 
Goodrich  "makes  the  Episcopalians  about  one  in  thirteen 
of  the  whole  number  of  the  inhabitants."  With  the  ap- 
proach of  the  Revolution,  Connecticut  experienced  the 
same  troubles  that  overtook  other  colonies,  and  such 
/churchmen  as  Seabury  and  Samuel  Peters  were  roughly 
\  used.  Seabury  ofWestchester,  orTaccdunt  of  certain  writ- 
x  ings  was  arrested,  and  held  a  prisoner  for  some  time,  being 
finally  released.*  Peters,  of  Hebron,  did  not  find  the  peo- 

*  Seabury  was  the  author  of  pamphlets,  by  "A.  W.  Farmer,"  signifying,  "A 
Westchester  Farmer,"  replied  to  by  Alexander  Hamilton  (Shea's  "Hamilton,"  p. 
292).  Their  authorship  has  been  attributed  to  Seabury  and  Wilkins  jointly,  and  by 
Mr.  Pintard  to  Wilkins  alone.  A  manuscript  Memorial  in  Bishop  Seabury's  hand- 
writing, drawn  up  while  in  England  in  search  of  consecration,  and  supported  by  the 
certificates  of  Drs.  Chandler  and  Cooper,  proves  his  authorship  beyond  question. 
The  MSS.  are  in  the  possession  of  his  grandson,  Prof.  VVm.  J.  Seabury.  The  pam- 
phlets show  decided  literary  ability.  There  appears  to  be  no  room,  in  this  connec- 
tion, to  enter  upon  any  estimate  of  the  part  performed  by  Bishop  Seabury  in  laying 
the  foundations  of  the  Church,  though  he  is  entitled  to  a  very  high  place  in  the  esti- 
mation of  our  people.  See  his  petition,  "Ch.  Review,"  vol.  ix. 


xlii 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 


pie  so  lenient,  and  finally  fled  the  country,  while  others 
of  the  clergy  fell  under  popular  displeasure,  owing  to  their 
devotion  to  the  Crown.     As  the  work  progressed,  churches  \ 
were  closed,  desecrated,  or  burnt,  notably  at  Fairfield  and  / 
Norwalk.     Mr.  Learning,   one  of  the  most   prominent   of  I 
the  clergy,  fled   to  New  York,  and   Beach  and   Kneeland 
died;    Seabury  taking  duty  as  a  chaplain    in  _the  British 
service.     At  the*  close  of  the  war,  however,  something  re- 
mained.    When  the  smoke  rolled  away,  on  the  last  week 
of  March,  ten  out  of  the  fourteen  parochial  clergy  who  held 
their  places,  assembled  at  Woodbury  to  reorganize;  and 
in  due  time  Dr.  Samuel  Seabury  was  sent  to  England  with 
a  view  to  Episcopal  consecration,*  which  he  received  from 
the  Nonjurors,  November  24th,  1784. 

The  sketch  of  Episcopacy  in  Massachusetts  has  already 
been  brought  down  to  the  year  1662.  At  this  period  Crom- 
well  had  fallen,  and  Charles  II.  had  ascended  the  throne. 
June  28th,  1662,  the  King  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Massa- 
chusetts authorities,  which  was  of  the  nature  of  a  procla- 
mation, enjoining  freedom  for  churchmen  to  "  use  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  perform  their  devotions  in 
that  manner."  The  Rev.  Joshua  Moody  of  Portsmouth 
thought  this  "  a  very  tremendous  thing  to  us,"  and  for  a 
long  time  the  Congregational  party  sought  the  means  of 
eluding  the  command.  In  1664,  four  commissioners  were 
sent  over  by  the  King  to  inquire  into  the  general  adminis- 
tration. One  of  these  commissioners  was  Samuel  Maverick, 
who  had  been  obliged  to  leave  Boston  and  go  to  England, 
on  account  of  his  churchmanship.  Maverick  and  his  asso- 
ciates, finding  that  the  letter  of  the  King  had  been  disre- 
garded, demanded,  among  other  things,  that  his  co-relig- 
ionists "  should  no  longer  be  fined  for  not  attending  the 
religious  meetings,  as  they  had  hitherto  been,"  and  that 


*  For  the  narrative  of  this  period  of  Connecticut  history,  see  Beardsley's  "  His- 
tory of  the  Church  in  Connecticut,"  two  volumes  8vo.,  also  his  Lives  of  the  two 
Johnsons,  and  his  Life  of  Bishop  Seabury. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xliii 

.they  should  "let  the  Quakers  alone."*  They  also  de- 
manded that  the  restoration  of  the  royal  family  should  be 
celebrated  by  an  annual  thanksgiving  as  at  home,  which 
was  agreed  to.  In  New  England,  at  this  period,  thanks- 
giving days  were  irregular  and  sporadic,  the  festival  which 
was  finally  established  being  the  outgrowth  of  customs 
observed  in  the  Church  of  England. t  With  respect  to  tol- 
eration, however,  the  Massachusetts  authorities  were  amus- 
ingly evasive  and  well  nigh  impertinent.  Their  answer 
was,  "as  to  ecclesiastical  privileges  they  had  commended, 
to  the  ministry  and  the  people  here  the  Word  of  the  Lord 
for  their  rule."^  Thus  unfavorable  was  their  reply,  though' 
when  visited  by  the  Royal  Commissioners,  their  co-religion- 
ists of  Connecticut,  in  theory,  accepted  toleration.  It  was 
clear  that  Massachusetts  must  soon  yield.  Drake  says, 
"  It  was  not  until  1664,  that  the  Church  service  was  per- 
formed in  Boston  without  molestation. "§  In  1665,  the 
commissioners  had  a  chaplain  with  them,  but  there  was  no 
place  of  worship  in  Boston  for  churchmen.il  In  1677,  how- 
ever, the  general  court  being  unable  to  stand  the  pressure, 
it  was  ordered,  that  no  person  should  be  hindered  from 
performing  the  Church  of  England  service ;T  yet,  such  was 
the  local  hostility,  that,  as  late  as  1682,  it  was  necessary 
for  Randolph  to  assure  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  that 
clergymen  of  the  Church  would  not  be  interfered  with. 

Early  in  1685,  a  great  change  took  place  in  the  colony. 
Its  charter  was  then  taken  away  by  James  II.,  who  set  up 
a  royal  government,  appointing  Joseph  Dudley  President. 
May  1 5th,  1686,  he  arrived  in  the  Rose  Frigate.  With 


*  Drake's  "Boston,"  p.  371. 

t  See  article  "Genesis  of  Thanksgiving,"  the  "Churchman,"  Nov.  22,  1879, 
and  Dexter's  "Congregationalism,"  p.  457. 

\  Hutchinson's  "  History,"  i.  243. 

§  Drake's  "Boston,"  p.  467.  On  the  period  see  Mass.  Coll.,  2d  series,  vol. 
viii.,  p.  52. 

||  "History  of  King's  Chapel,"  p.  16. 

H  Hutchinson's  "History,"  i.  355. 


xliv  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH, 

him  came  the  Rev.  Robert  Ratcliffe,  a  clergyman  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  the  first  parochial  minister  of 
Boston.  The  same  day  the  organization  of  a  parish  was 
effected,  when  Dr.  Benjamin  Bullivant  and  Mr.  Richard 
Banker  were  elected  wardens.  It  was  voted  to  take  up  a 
collection  "  every  Sabbath  day  after  evening  sermon," 
while  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  the  Bishop  of 
London  were  requested  to  favor  "  our  Church."  The  first 
collection,  made  Sunday,  June  2Oth,  when  services  were 
commenced,  amounted  to  ^3~TfsTOd.  A  room  was  taken 
in  the  Town  House,  and  a  movable  pulpit  and  twelve 
benches  were  ordered.  Mr.  Ratcliffe  was  voted  a  salary 
of  £40  per  annum;  while  a  "sober  and  fitt  person,"  as 
"  clarke,"  was  to  receive  "for  his  paynes  2Os.  a  weeke."* 
Thus  humble  was  the  beginning,  though  at  the  time  there 
appear  to  have  been  several  hundred  persons  in  the  colony 
favorable  to  the  Church.  Dunton,  the  bookseller,  de- 
scribes Ratcliffe  as  a  preacher.  The  next  place  of  meet- 
ing was  the  Exchange,  where,  at  the  Wednesday  and 
Friday  meetings,  Mr.  Ratcliffe  could  overhear  the  citizens 
/  outside  referring  to  "  Baal's  priest,"  while  from  the  Congre- 
1  gational  pulpits  the  Church  prayers  were  called,  "  Leeks, 
^  garlic  and  trash. "t  Randolph  in  his  letter  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  gives  a  vivid  picture  of  the  condition 
of  things,  and  coolly  proposes  .that  the  "  three  meeting- 
houses of  Boston,"  should  pay  "  twenty  shillings  a  week, 
apiece,"  to  support  the  Episcopal  services. 

December  I9th,  1686,  Sir  Edmund  Andros  superseded 
Dudley,  and  on  the  23d  of  March,  1687,  he  demanded  the 
keys  of  the  "  Old  South  Meeting-house,"  that  the  Church 
service  might  be  celebrated.  Judge  Sewall,  with  the  com- 
mittee, waited  upon  the  governor  and  refused,  but  on  the 


*  "Hist.  King's  Chapel,"  p.  22. 

t  Hutch.  "Col.  Papers,"  p.  549,  and  John  Dunton's  "Journal."  Also  Se- 
wall's  "Diary,"  vol.  i.  p.  141.  In  "St.  Chrysostom's  Magazine,"  vol.  ii.  nos.  II 
and  12,  are  letters  purporting  to  have  been  written  by  Ratcliffe. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xlv 

25th,  Good  Friday,  Andros  ordered  the  sexton  to  open 
the  doors  and  ring  the  bell.*  This,  of  course,  was  a  plain 
case  of  usurpation.  On  February  loth,  the  funeral  of  Lady 
Andros  took  place  at  the  "  Old  South,"  the  ceremonies 
exciting  great  attention.  About  this  time  Mr.  Ratcliffe 
was  interrupted  at  the  funeral  of  Lilly  by  a  deacon  of  the 
"Old  South." t  April  i8th,  1689,  Andros  was  deposed  by 
the  people,  and  Randolph,  Warden  Bullivant,  and  others, 
were  thrown  into  the  fort.  Upon  the  accession  of  William 
and  Mary  they  were  sent  to  England  with  Andros  for  trial. 
Ratclifife  and  Clarke  also  disappeared,  but  in  the  mean  time 
a  wooden  church  had  been  built.  In  1694  it  was  still 
without  pews.  The  Rev.  Samuel  Myles  was  on  the  ground 
July  1st,  1689.  He  went  to  England  in  1692;  and  a  Mr. 
Smith  and  a  Mr.  Hatton  officiated  until  his  return,  July 
24th,  1696. 

In  1702  Dudley  reappeared  in  Boston,  now  as  Governor 
of  Massachusetts,  and  while  a  vestryman  of  the  Church 
attended  the  Congregational  Communion  at  Roxbury.  In 
1710  "  Queen's  Chapel"  was  enlarged,  and  the  people  ad- 
dressed the  Queen  with  respect  to  the  appointment  of 
bishops,  saying  that  about  eight  hundred  persons  were 
attached  to  the  congregation.  In  1723  Christ  Church  was 
established  under  the  Rev.  Mr.  Cutler,  formerly  president 
of  Yale  College;  and  in  1729  Mr.  Price  succeeded  Mr. 
Myles  at  what  had  become  "  King's  Chapel."  Services 
were  commenced  at  Newbury,  \  Marblehead,§  and  other 
places.  We  do  not  wish,  however,  to  pursue  these  matters 
in  detail,  but  simply  to  indicate  the  general  course  of 


*  Sewall's  "Diary,"  i.  p.  171. 

t  Greenwood's  "  King's  Chapel,"  p.  42. 

J  See  "Mass.  Papers,"  p.  109. 

§  Roads'  "  History  of  Marblehead."  In  1768,  the  Boston  "Chronicle,"  of  Sept. 
26th,  says,  "  Wednesday  last  a  convention  of  the  Episcopal  clergy  was  held  in  this 
town,  when  the  Rev.  Mr.  Arthur  Browne,  of  Portsmouth,  New  Hampshire, 
preached  a  sermon  on  the  occasion  at  King's  Chapel."  As  early  as  1742  mission 
work  was  in  progress  at  St.  George's  River.  See  on  Maine  the  "  Mass.  Papers." 


xlvi  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH, 

events.  Price  was  appointed  commissary,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Dr.  Caner,  who  served  until  the  church  was 
closed  at  the  commencement  of  the  Revolution;  though 
it  should  be  noted  that  the  church  was  rebuilt  of  stone  in 
1749.  Trinity  Church  had  also  been  established,  the  pulpit 
being  supplied  by  the  clergy  of  the  Chapel  and  Christ 
Church  until  1740,  when  Mr.  Davenport  became  minister; 
who,  in  turn,  was  succeeded  by  Messrs.  Hooper,  Walter, 
and  Parker,  the  latter  being  connected  with  the  church 
from  1774  until  his  death  in  1804. 

At  Christ  Church,  Cutler,  who  died  in  1765,  had  for  his 
successors  Messrs.  Greaton,  Byles,  Lewis,  and  Montague.* 
Dr.  Cutler  had  four  hundred  regular  attendants  at  the  ser- 
vices. This  ancient  church  contains  the  first  chime  of  bells 
cast  for  America,  and  the  first  monument  erected  to  Wash- 
ington. From  the  tower  was  hung  out  the  signal  lantern, 
on  the  eve  of  the  battle  of  Concord  and  Lexington.f 

During  the  Revolution  services  were  maintained  at  Christ 
Church  and  Trinity,  but  at  "King's  Chapel"  they  were 
suspended  March  loth,  1776.  Caner,  who  was  a  royalist, 
left  the  city  upon  its  evacuation  by  the  British  troops;  tak- 
ing with  him  the  records,  the  vestments,  and  the  plate,  the 
latter  amounting  to  two  thousand  eight  hundred  ounces  of 
silver,  the  gift  of  three  crowned  heads.  The  records  were 
returned  in  1805,  but  the  vestments  and  plate  were  not 
found.  This  brings  us  to  an  event  that  should  be  touched 
upon,  the  loss  of  this  building  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  which  was  rebuilt  of  stone. 

It  appears  that  the  Chapel  remained  closed  until  1777, 
when  the  proprietors  granted  the  use  of  it  to  the  con- 
gregation of  the  Old  South  Church,  so  unjustly  treated 
by  Governor  Andros.  This  congregation  held  possession 
gratuitously  for  about  five  years,  at  the  end  of  which 
time,  their  own  house,  which  had  been  taken  as  a  train- 


*  Drake's  "Boston,"  p.  567. 

t  Proceedings  of  "Mass.  Hist.  So.,"  1876,  p.  179,  and  "Mass.  Papers,"  142-3. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xlvii 

ing  school  for  Burgoyne's  cavalry,  was  repaired.*  They  left 
the  Chapel  in  February,  1783;  but  during  the  previous 
summer  a  number  of  the  old  proprietors  concluded  to  re- 
establish services.  September  8th,  1782,  they  invited  Mr. 
James  Freeman,  of  Walpole,  to  officiate  as  lay  reader  for 
six  months.  The  invitation  was  sent  through  the  wardens, 
Dr.  Thomas  Bulfinch  and  James  Ivers.  Mr.  Freeman  en- 
tered upon  his  duties  October  i8th,  1782;  and  the  Episcopal 
and  Congregational  Societies  appear  to  have  held  joint  oc- 
cupancy until  the  latter  removed  the  following  February. 
April  2ist  Mr.  Freeman  was  elected  minister  on  a  salary 
of  two  hundred  pounds.  At  this  time  the  wardens  say, 
"the  proprietors  consent  to  such  alterations  in  the  service 
as  are  made  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Parker;  and  leave  the  Atha- 
nasian  Creed  at  your  discretion."!  These  alterations  were 
simply  such  as  the  changed  political  condition  of  the  coun- 
try demanded.  The  congregation  appears  as  an  Episco- 
pal organization,  Mr.  Freeman,  for  whom  Episcopal  or- 
dination was  contemplated,  carefully  abstaining  from  the 
assumption  of  priestly  functions.  It  has  been  claimed,  that 
in  the  summer  of  1784  "  King's  Chapel"  and  its  lay  reader 
were  supposed  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  Church.  It  has 
also  been  claimed  that  at  that  time  the  parish  received  a 
notice  from  Bishop  White  of  the  action  of  the  Church  in 
Pennsylvania,  of  May  25th,  1784.  At  least  a  copy  of  the 
Broadside  already  referred  to  came  into  the  possession  of 
Mr.  Freeman. £  This  document  states  that  the  Pennsyl- 
vania convention  empowered  its  committee  "to  correspond 
and  confer  with  representatives  from  the  Episcopal  Church 


*  Wisner's  "History  of  the  Old  South,"  p.  34,  January  I4th,  1776,  Dr.  Caner 
says,  "The  wealthier  part  of  my  parish  have  provided  for  themselves  by  removing 
to  England  and  elsewhere,"  and  speaks  of  "the  poverty  of  the  few  remaining  par- 
ishioners,"  "Mass.  Papers,"  p.  584. 

f  Or.  Dr.  Parker's  "Troubles  and  the  menaces  he  endured,"  see  "Mass.  Pa- 
pers," p.  696.  These  papers  should  be  consulted  on  the  entire  period. 

f  The  Broadside  is  now  in  the  possession  of  the  Rev.  James  Freeman  Clarke,  a 
grandson  of  Mr.  Freeman. 


xlviii  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH, 

in  the  other  states,  or  any  of  them,  and  assist  in  forming 
an  ecclesiastical  government."  It  may  perhaps  be  con- 
ceded that  this  communication,  signed  in  autograph  by 
Bishop  White,  was  addressed  officially  to  the  parish  of 
44  King's  Chapel,"  but  of  this  there  is  no  proof.  If,  how- 
ever, they  were  thus  invited  to  share  in  the  deliberations, 
it  was  with  the  distinct  understanding  that  the  Doctrine 
and  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England  were  to  be  adhered 
to  without  question,  as  the  principles  of  the  Broadside 
state.  Under  the  circumstances,  therefore,  such  an  invi- 
tation would  have  been  proper.  The  Church  welcomed  all 
who  came  in  accordance  with  the  principles  recognized; 
which,  in  substance,  were  endorsed  by  the  convention  in 
Massachusetts,  September  8th,  1784.  New  England,  how-\ 
ever,  was  not  represented  at  the  primaryTjefieraT  Conven-  I 
tion,  held  at  Philadelphia,  September  27th,  1785.  . 

In  the  mean  while,  Mr.  Freeman's  chang<ToT  theological 
views  became  known,  and,  in  accordance  with  his  wishes, 
leading  members  of  the  congregation  resolved  to  make 
additional  alterations  in  the  Liturgy.  Before  doing  this, 
Mr.  Greenwood  frankly  admits,  they  saw  the  necessity  of 
getting  possession  of  the  Church  property,  a  measure  car- 
ried January  loth,  1785,  by  a  majority,  such  as  it  was,  of 
twenty-four  to  seventeen.  On  the  nineteenth  of  the  same 
month,  wjthout  waiting  for  the  action  of  the  Philadelphia 
Convention,  the  changes  in  the  Liturgy  were  accomplished, 
being  chiefly  in  accordance  with  the  Liturgy  of  Dr.  Samuel  \ 
Clarke.  They  still  considered  themselves  an  44  Episcopal  " 
parish,  and,  in  November,  1785,  when  their  revised  Liturgy 
was  printed,  a  copy  was  sent  to  Bishop  White  for  exam- 
ination. At  the  convention,  the  previous  September,  the 
44  Proposed  Book "  had  been  framed,  yet  every  thing  was 
provisional;  and  Bishop  White  evidently  did  not  consider 
the  action  of  King's  Chapel  as  final.  In  fact  he  did  not 
consider  that,  by  dropping  certain  phrases,  they  had  de- 
liberately abandoned  the  faith  of  the  Church;  though  in 
his  letter  of  December  1st,  addressed  to  Mr.  Miller,  who 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  xlix 

had  sent  the  Chapel  Liturgy,  he  says,  "  You  can  not  long 
continue  to  profess  yourselves  Episcopalians,  unless  in  a 
sense  in  which  the  word  is  not  customarily  used.*     A  lit- 1 
tie  further  on  he  speaks  of  his  apprehension  that  the  parish  ^ 
might   become   "  either  Arian  or  Socinian,   or  Congrega-V 
ttonal  in  government  or  both,"  which  indicates  that,  in  his^ 
opinion,  they  had  then  not  definitely  reached  that  point.  J 
Here  the  communication  between  Bishop  White  and  King's! 
Chapel  appears  to  have  ended. f 

In  time  the  real  sentiments  of  the  majority  at  the  Chapel 
became  fully  apparent,  and  no  disposition  was  shown  to 
recede  from  the  action  taken  in  revising  the  Liturgy.  Nev- 
ertheless, as  late  as  July  29th,  1787,  the  proprietors  of 
King's  Chapel  applied  to  Bishop  Provoost  for  the  ordina- 
tion of  Mr.  Freeman,  the  committee  declaring  in  their  let- 
ter, that  they  have  no  intention  of  returning  to  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  though  expressing  their  regret  that 
they  had  been  so  long  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  the  sacra- 
ments. They  also  say:  "  By  the  terms  of  the  ordination 
which  Mr.  Montague,^  minister  of  Christ  Church  in  this 
town,  has  received  from  the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  White,  we 
find  he  has  only  subscribed  a  declaration  of  faith  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  and  a  solemn  engagement  to  conform  to 
the  doctrines  and  worship  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  State  of  Massachusetts;  in  this  state  no 
doctrines  or  form  of  worship  are  yet  established.  Has  not 
our  Church  therefore  as  good  a  claim  to  style  itself  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  State  of  Massachusetts 
as  any  other?  "§  The  Bishop  of  New  York,  after  consulta- 


*  Wilson's  "Memoirs,"  p.  326. 

f  It  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  page  1 16  of  this  work  that  a  delegate  from  Vir- 
ginia, in  General  Convention,  proposed  to  omit  the  first  four  petitions  of  the  Litany, 
but  not  because  he  doubted  the  divinity  of  our  Lord.  Some  no  doubt  supposed 
that  in  revising  the  Liturgy  the  committee  of  King's  Chapel  were  moved  by  such 
reasons  as  controlled  the  action  of  the  person  alluded  to. 

\  The  Rev.  William  Montague,  ordained  June  24th,  1787. 

§  Greenwood's  "King's  Chapel,"  p.  182. 


1  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

lion  with  some  of  the  laity,  referred  the  committee  to  the 
coming  convention  of  the  Church,  and  made  the  answer 
that  he  did  not  feel  at  liberty  to  act  on  the  question  at  the 
time.*  This,  it  would  appear,  decided  their  course,  and 
they  resolved  upon  Congregational  ordination  for  Mr. 
Freeman,  which  was  accomplished,  November  i8th,  1787. 
Then,  says  Mr.  Greenwood,  "the  first  Episcopal  Church\ 
in  New  _Erigland  became  the  first ^Tjnitarian  Church  in  / 
America."  We,  however,  have  already  seen  (ante  p.  xxiii.)/ 
that  King's  Chapel  was  not  the  first  Episcopal  Church  in  \ 
New  England,  while  it  yet  remains  to  be  demonstrated  that 
the  twenty-four  who  created  the  change  were  ever  church- 
men in  any  true  sense  of_the  term.  All  that  they  them- 
selves claimed  was  the  character  of  legal  "  proprietors." 
At  that  period  confirmation  was  not  to  be  had,  and  men 
attached  themselves  to  congregations  in  a  loose  way. 
Governor  Dudley,  for  instance,  while  a  vestryman  of 
King's  Chapel  attended  the  Congregational  service  at 
Roxbury  and  received  the  Communion.  The  Earl  of 
Bellomont  also  while  in  Boston  affected  the  "  Thursday 
lecture."  Then  as  now  there  was  a  class  of  men  who 
have  no  deep  convictions,  but  simply  seek  respectable  con- 
nections, persons  who  join  in  movements  without  changing 
their  opinions,  because  they  have  no  opinions  to  change. 
The  following  confession  of  a  recent  writer  shows  the 
true  state  of  the  case.  "Candor,"  he  says,  "requires  me  to 
add  that  the  conservative  element  in  the  society  had,  no 
doubt,  left  the  country;  and  that  the  proprietors  who  re- 
mained were  of  a  robust  cast  of  mind  not  reluctant  to 


•  To  say  that  no  doctrines  or  forms  of  worship  were  established  in  Massachusetts 
is  not  altogether  consistent  with  the  fact  that,  as  shown  on  page  89  of  this  work, 
Massachusetts,  Sept.  8th,  1784,  distinctly  declared  for  the  doctrine  and  orders  and 
worship  of  the  Church  of  England.  On  the  other  hand,  the  course  of  Bishop  Pro- 
voost  was  not  what  might  have  been  expected,  as  their  rebellion  was  patent  to  the 
whole  country,  entitling  them  to  nothing  more  than  a  plain  denial.  Bishop  White, 
however,  exonerates  Bishop  Provoost  from  the  charge  of  doctrinal  sympathy  with 
King's  Chapel.  See  page  117,  note. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  li 

change."  *  It  is  sufficiently  clear  that  many  of  those  who 
represented  the  conservative  element  had  left  Boston,  and 
that  a  majority  of  those  left  behind  were  of  the  "  robust," 
or  opinionless  class,  ready  to  acquiesce  in  a  change  when 
asked  for  by  one  to  whom  they  were  attached.  The 
change  at  King's  Chapel  was  in  reality  a  Congregational 
victory.  The  Congregationalists  were  elated,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  churchmen  were  highly  indignant.  In  the  pub- 
lic press,  Parker,  Bass,  Montague  and  Ogden,  of  Portsmouth, 
on  behalf  of  the  clergy,  denounced  the  act  as  illegal.  The 
majority  of  twenty-four  practically  acknowledged  the  weak- 
ness of  their  position,  by  offering  to  pay  for  twenty-nine 
pews,  which  they  had  declared  forfeited  to  the  corporation 
in  order  to  control  the  property.  Technically,  the  rights 
of  the  proprietors  may  have  been  extinguished,  but,  if*  so, 
it  was  in  accordance  with  results  accomplished  by  the  war, 
which  drove  many  parishioners  from  their  homes;  an 
event  not  anticipated  and  therefore  not  to  be  taken  ad- 
vantage of.  In  fact,  no  such  advantage  would  have  been 
sought,  but  for  the  desperate  strait  of  the  Unitarians,  who 
were  determined  to  obtain  possession  of  the  property;  and 
who,  after  depriving  the  proprietors  of  their  sacred  rights, 
added  to  the  indignity  by  offering  money.  Still  more,  the 
usurpers  told  the  remonstrants,  that  they  were  out  of  their 
senses;  for  "no  man  in  his  senses  will  assert  that  they  [the 
Unitarians]  had  not  a  just  right  so  to  do."  Bishop  White, 
nevertheless  had  anticipated  the  difficulty  in  1785,  when, 
in  writing  on  the  subject  of  their  revised  Liturgy,  he  framed 
a  paragraph  from  which  we  have  already  quoted.  He  says: 
"But  give  me  leave  briefly  to  suggest,  that  should  my 
apprehensions  be  well  founded,  of  your  society  becoming 
either  Arian  or  Socinian,  or  Congregational  in  government, 
or  both,  I  might  rest  my  argument  on  moral  obligation,  in 
respect  to  the  keeping  of  possession  of  the  house  heretofore 
known  by  the  name  of  King's  Chapel.  Our  churches,  and 

*  James  Freeman  Clarke,  in  the  "Independent,"  New  York,  Feb.  5th,  1880. 


lii  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

other  property  belonging  to  them,  were  evidently  bought 
and  given  as  to  component  parts  of  a  church,  the  great 
outlines  of  whose  doctrine  and  government  are  well  known. 
But  for  a  majority  of  a  congregation  to  destroy  these,  and 
so,  of  course,  to  compel  the  minority  to  give  up  their  in- 
terest in  said  property,  in  order  to  seek  what  they  conceive 
to  be  the  pure  Word  of  God,  and  a  more  Christian  wor- 
ship elsewhere,  is,  I  humbly  apprehend,  to  deprive  them  of 
their  just  rights;  whereas  .no  injury  is  offered,  in  expecting 
a  majority  to  relinquish  an  interest,  if  they  can  no  longer 
comply  with  the  terms  on  which  it  is  given."  The  far-see- 
ing bishop  here  disposed  of  the  whole  question,  showing 
that  the  action  of  the  twenty-four  was  without  proper 
foundations.* 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  glee  with  which 
this  action  was  greeted  by  Congregationalists.  But  their 
rejoicing  soon  came  to  an  end.  Unconsciously  they  had 
applauded  a  Congregational  Samson,  and  when  this  single 
pillar  of  the  faith  was  pulled  away,  the  house  ecclesiastical 
fell  and  crushed  them.f  The  first  fruit  was  in  1792,  when, 
as  Dr.  Dexter  confesses,  at  Taunton,  the  entire  Congrega- 
tional society,  "  with  the  exception  of  three  males  and  one 
female  seceded  from  the  town  parish,  organized  an  eccle- 
siatical  society  ....  which  continues  to  the  present  time." 
Buddington,  however,  shows  the  worst  of  it  where  he  says, 
speaking  of  the  general  defection  to  Unitarianism,  all  the 
ancient  churches  of  Boston  were  ranged  among  the  advo- 
cates of  the  New  Opinion,  with  the  exception  of  the  Old 
South.  Then  all  the  superiors  in  age,  "  the  church  of  Rob- 
inson of  Plymouth,  of  Higginson  of  Salem,  of  Cotton  in 
Boston,"  renounced,  "the  system  of  faith  in  which  they 
were  baptized,  and  for  which  they  were  nurtured  by  their 
pious  founders. "£ 


*  Wilson's  "Memoir,"  p.  326.     Letter  Dec.  1st,  1785. 

f  See  the  "Churchman,"  Jan.  loth,  1880,  on  "King's  Chapel." 

\  Buddington's  "  History  of  the  First  Parish  of  Charlestown." 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  liii 

In  the  mean  while  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 
under  the  leadership  of  the  sagacious  White,  stood  firm. 
It  is  remarkable,  upon  the  whole,  that  the  losses  were  not 
greater.  Indeed,  if  King's  Chapel  had  been  furnished  with 
a  regularly  educated  clergyman,  it  is  probable  that  the 
Church  would  never  have  been  endangered.  All  the  losses 
of  the  Church  elsewhere  were  such  as  resulted  from  the  war. 
These  were  very  severe  in  Virginia,  where  many  churches 
were  destroyed  and  where  the  clergy  were  reduced  from  Si  t 
ninety-one  to  twenty-eight.  One  good  result  nevertheless  / 
followed  the  war.  It  removed  the  popular  hostility  to  2-0 
bishops,  as  it  was  at  once  perceived,  that,  under  a  republic, 
they  could  have  no  advantages  over  the  laity  in  any  mat- 
ters connected  with  the  state.  It  therefore  became  pos- 
sible to  organize  the  Church.  This  leads  us,  in  bringing 
this  sketch  to  a  close,  to  notice  the  career  of  him,  whom 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  in  1836,  styles  "in  more 
senses  than  one,"  the  Father  of  the  American  Church.* 

William  White,  son  of  Colonel  Thomas  White  and 
Esther  Hewlings,  was  born  in  Philadelphia,  March  24th, 
1747  (O.  S.).  Pursuing  his  preparatory  studies  in  the  city 
of  his  birth,  he  graduated  from  the  College  of  Philadelphia 
at  the  age  of  seventeen.  At  this  time  he  had  fully  decided 
to  adopt  the  sacred  profession.  After  pursuing  his  theo- 
logical studies  under  the  guidance  of  the  local  clergy, 
being  especially  indebted  to  Dr.  Peters  and  Mr.  Duche, 
he  sailed  for  England,  where,  December  23d,  1770,  in  /  *7 
the  Royal  Chapel,  London,  he  was  ordained  deacon  by 
Dr.  Young,  Bishop  of  Norwich.  Remaining  in  London 
about  a  year  and  half,  he  saw  considerable  society,  meeting 
Goldsmith  and  Dr.  Johnson.  June,  1772,  he  was  advanced  1*17 'i 
to*~the  priesthood  by  Dr.  Terrick,  Bishop  of  London.  He  '•  ' 
at  once  sailed  for  Philadelphia,  where  he  arrived  September 
1 3th,  soon  being  elected  assistant  minister  of  Christ  Church 
and  St.  Peter's. 

*  Wilson's  "Memoir,"  p.  264. 


liv  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

When  the  Revolution  dawned  he  took  sides  with  the 
colonies  without  wavering.  Upon  the  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence, he  ceased  praying  for  the  King,  and  was  the 
I  second  person  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  Com- 
monwealth of  Pennsylvania.  September,  1777,  he  became 
chaplain  to  the  Continental  Congress.  April,  1779,  he  was 
elected  rector  of  Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's,  Phil- 
adelphia, devoting  himself  with  much  zeal  to  the  dis- 
charge of  his  duties,  and  winning  the  approval  of  the 
entire  community. 

When  the  time  drew  near  to  take  measures  for  the  or- 
ganization of  the  Church,  believing  that  it  would  be  imprac- 
ticable to  obtain  the  Episcopal  succession  from  England, 
at  least  for  a  time,  he  prepared  a  pamphlet,  entitled  "The 
Case  of  the  Episcopal  Churches  in  the  United  States  Con- 
sidered," in  which  he  proposed  a  prqvi^iojTal^  organization^ 
that  was  to  be  superseded  as  soon  as  the  succession  could  / 
be  obtained.  Happily,  however,  the  accomplishment  or 
political  independence  was  attended  by  its  recognition  on 
the  part  of  the  British  Government,  leaving  no  difficulty 
in  the  way  of  organization  in  accordance  with  the  system 
of  the  Church  of  England.  Nevertheless  the  author  of 
the  pamphlet  was  misunderstood  in  some  quarters,  while, 
at  a  later  period,  his  production  was  used  for  purposes  en- 
tirely foreign  to  the  author's  intentions.  The  criticism  ex- 
cited was  met  by  Bishop  White  and  disarmed  of  force,  so 
that  no  permanent  harm  resulted  from  his  proposition.* 
The  churchmanship  of  Bishop  White  was  thoroughly 
sound,  he  being  conservative  and  opposed  to  all  doctrinal 
and  ecclesiastical  innovations. 

When  peace  was  declared,  he  was  at  once  looked  to  as 
the  proper  person  to  lead  in  the  organization  of  the  Amer- 
ican Church,  and  accordingly  he  was  elected  Bishop  of 


*  On  this  Pamphlet,  see  the  present  volume,  p.  99.  For  a  list  of  Bishop 
White's  writings,  see  Wilson's  "Memoir,"  page  305,  and  Sprague's  "American 
Pulpit."  v.  283. 


THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH.  Iv 

'ennsylvania.     His   own  narrative  gives  the  story  of  his 
election  and  consecration,  which  took  place  in  Lambeth 

ipel,  London,  February  4th,  J7J7_.     He  arrived  in  New      / 'J %  *i 
York,  on  Easter  S"unday~of  tnesame  year.     Easter  Day,  j 
1787,  will,  therefore,  possess  a  peculiar  significance  to  the  < 
end  of  time.     It  marks  the  Renaissance  of  the  American  ) 
Church;   of  which  he  stood  the  acknowledged  head  until  | 
his  decease.     That  event  took  place  July  I7th,  1836.     He 
is  now  known  to  the  world  as  the  Father  of  the  Protestant    / 
Episcopal    Church  in  the  United    States  of  America.     It 
is,   therefore,   needless  for  the  writer  to  enter  here  upon 
•     ,jj  any  fresh  estimate  of  his  character  and  work.     These  have 
been  weighed  judiciously,  by  various  writers,  and  notably 
>i  by  the  late  Alonzo  Potter,  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania,  who 
i'V    attributes  to  Bishop  White  commanding  intellectual  and 
moral    qualities;    saying,    "If  his    rhetorical    powers   had 
equalled  his  erudition  and  his  capacity  for  thought,  and 
had  we  been  ready  to  honor  as  we  ought  the  writers  of 
our  own  country,  the  name  of  White  had  now  stood  side 
by  side  with  those  of  Seeker,  Porteus,  Horsley  and  Home." 
The  time,  however,  is  coming,  he  says,  "when  Bishop  White 
will  be  recognized  as  the  Founder  and  wise  Master-builder 
of  a  system   of  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  which,   though  not 
faultless,  is  as  perfect  as  the  condition  of  things  then  ad- 
mitted, and  of  which  the  essential  excellence  is  likely  to 
be  demonstrated  by  the  progress  of  events."  * 

Yet  the  opinion  of  the  large-hearted  and  able  prelate, 
whose  words  we  quote,  goes  farther.  Bishop  White  is 
regarded  by  him  as  a  providential  character,  and  as  ac- 
complishing for  the  Church  what  Washington  did  for  the 
Nation.  Therefore,  after  speaking  of  Washington's  singu- 

*  The  Address  of  Bishop  Alonzo  Potter,  delivered  on  the  occasion  of  laying  the 
corner-stone  of  Calvary  Monumental  Church,  Philadelphia,  April,  1851.  See 
Sprague's  "Annals  of  the  American  Pulpit,"  also  the  "Memoir  of  Bishop  White," 
by  his  friend  and  admirer  Dr.  Bird  Wilson,  and  the  very  valuable  work  entitled, 
"Account  of  the  Meeting  of  the  Descendants  of  Colonel  Thomas  White  of  Mary- 
land,"  Philadelphia,  1879. 


hi  THE    COLONIAL    CHURCH. 

lar  adaptation  to  his  mission,  and  of  the  impossibility  of  ac- 
counting for  it  on  any  human  principle,  Bishop  Potter  says, 
referring  to  Bishop  White,  "  It  was  the  same  with  him 
who  was  called,  like  another  Moses,  to  lead  our  Church 
out  of  her  long  captivity,  and  through  a  wilderness  of 
suffering  and  humiliation, — he  was  sent  of  God."  This 
is  a  generous  estimate,  but  it  is  evidently  just;  there 
being,  however,  no  desire  to  overlook  the  claims  of  those 
who  early  shared  with  him  the  onerous  duties  of  the 
Episcopal  office,  nor  any  wish  to  ignore  the  services  of 
presbyters  and  faithful  laymen  who  from  the  beginning 
stayed  up  his  hands.  Bishop  White  was  fortunate  in  his 
associates,  of  whose  reputation  he  was  never  envious;  and 
the  care  which  he  took  to  secure  to  them  their  true  posi- 
.  tion  in  the  public  estimation  will  render  his  own  fame  safe 
to  the  end  of  time. 


MEMOIRS 


PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 


DEDICATION. 


TO  THE  BISHOPS  OF  THE   PROTESTANT   EPISCOPAL 

CHURCH. 

MY    MUCH    ESTEEMED    BRETHREN, 

THE  motive  to  the  prefixing  of  a  dedication  to  these 
Memoirs,  is  the  opportunity  thus  afforded  of  testifying  to 
the  Church  at  large,  the  harmony  which  has  subsisted 
among  us  in  our  joint  counsels  for  the  conducting  of  our 
ecclesiastical  concerns.  If,  at  any  time  there  has  been  a 
shade  of  difference  of  opinion,  it  has  been  overbalanced 
by  the  pleasure  of  mutual  concession,  and  by  the  profit 
of  amicable  discussion. 

AH  of  you  have  been  ordained  to  the  Episcopacy  by 
my  hands.  Submission  of  opinion  on  this  account,  is 
what  I  have  never  had  the  arrogancy  to  claim :  but  if 
any  degree  of  personal  respect  should  be  supposed  a 
natural  consequence,  I  can  thankfully  acknowledge  that 
it  has  been  bestowed. 

Having  lived  in  days  in  which  there  existed  prejudices 
in  our  land  against  the  name,  and  much^more  against  the 
office,  of  a  bishop;  and  when  it  was  doubtful  whether  any 


2  DEDICA  TIOJV. 

person  in  that  character  would  be  tolerated  in  the  com- 
munity; I  now  contemplate  nine  of  our  number,  conduct- 
ing the  duties  of  their  office  without  interruption;  and 
in  regard  not  to  them  only,  but  to  ten  of  us  who  have 
gone  to  their  rest,  I  trust  the  appeal  may  be  made  to 
the  world,  for  their  not  being  chargeable  with  causes 
of  offence  to  our  fellow  Christians  and  our  fellow  citi- 
zens generally,  or  with  the  assuming  of  any  powers 
within  our  communion,  not  confessedly  recognized  by 
our  ecclesiastical  institutions. 

Being  your  senior  by  many  years,  I  enjoy  satisfaction 
in  the  expectation  of  the  good  which  you  may  be  ex- 
pected to  be  achieving,  in  what  is  now  our  common 
sphere  of  action,  when  I  shall  be  removed  from  it:  and, 
with  my  prayers  for  the  success  of  your  endeavors  to 
this  effect, 

I  subscribe  myself, 

Your  affectionate  brother, 

THE  AUTHOR. 


PEEFAOE 


THE    FIRST    EDITION 


MANY  years  ago,  the  author  of  the  following  work  began  to  com- 
mit to  writing  the  most  material  facts  which  had  occurred,  relative  to 
the  Church  of  which  he  is  a  minister:  intending,  in  the  event  of  the 
continuance  of  life  and  health,  to  carry  on  the  recital.  This  was  not 
with  a  view  to  early  publication,  because  of  the  small  extent  of  the 
sphere,  in  which  the  detail  of  very  recent  events  was  likely  to  interest 
curiosity.  Accordingly,  what  was  thus  prepared  lay  unnoticed,  until 
an  application  was  made,  about  twelve  years  ago,  by  the  editor  of  the 
American  edition  of  Dr.  Rees's  Cyclopedia,  requesting  attention  to 
certain  parts  of  that  work,  with  a  view  to  other  objects.  On  this 
occasion  it  occurred,  that  there  might  be  propriety  and  use  in  insert- 
ing, in  a  work  of  that  kind,  a  brief  account  of  what  had  been  trans- 
acted during  some  years  preceding,  within  the  Episcopal  Church.  For 
this  reason,  there  was  made  a  draft  from  the  notes  before  taken,  for 
the  purpose  stated.  As  what  remained  comprehended  sundry  matters, 
not  of  sufficiently  general  concern  for  insertion  in  the  Cyclopedia, 
it  was  afterwards  reviewed  under  the  impression  that  the  time  might 
come,  when  the  former  labor  would  not  be  unacceptable,  within  the 
communion  for  which  it  had  been  designed.  In  the  present  publi- 
cation, the  narrative  has  been  continued  to  the  present  time.  With 
it,  there  are  given  the  matters  kept  back  from  the  publication  in  the 
Cyclopedia;  and  a  continuation  of  similar  statements  and  remarks. 

It  has  been  occasionally  suggested,  from  a  knowledge  of  the  mate- 
rials in  the  hands  of  the  author,  and  in  consideration  of  the  oppor- 
tunities which  he  has  possessed  of  personal  observation  of  characters 


4  PREFACE    TO    THE   FIRST  EDITION. 

and  of  facts,  that  it  would  be  better  to  embody  the  narrative  with  the 
remarks,  and  to  make  a  history  of  the  whole.     The  mere  melting  of 
them  into  one  mass,  after  the  separation  of  them  as  related  above,  did 
not  seem  likely  to  be  fruitful  of  any  considerable  advantage;  and  as  to 
the  name  of  "a  history,"  it  would  not  only  be  disproportioned  to  the 
work,  but  perhaps  pledge  to  an  attempt,  beyond  what  there  are  mate- 
rials to  accomplish.     Of  materials  concerning  the  aggregate  Church, 
the  author  possesses  all  that  are  necessary,  and  more  than  will  be  here 
given;  the  view  being  confined  to  the  more  important:  but  his  collec- 
tions in  regard  to  the  Church  in  the  different  dioceses,  are  perhaps 
incomplete,  although  he  is  furnished  with  almost  all  their  journals, 
and  thinks  himself  well  informed  as  to  all  the  material  events  which 
have  occurred  for  half  a  century  backward.     Besides,  there  are  a  few 
points  on  which  he  wished  to  retain  a  liberty  that  would  be  incon- 
sistent with  the  fulness,  and,  considering  what  is  to  be  expected  in 
such  a  work,  the  fidelity  of  a  history.     One  of  these  points  is,  that  he^~ 
chooses  to  be  silent  in  regard  to  a  few  transactions,  which,  although*/    ^ 
sufficiently  known  and  discoursed  of  when  they  happened,  are  not  of   j 
so  much  importance  to  the  future  concerns  of  the  Church,  as  to  in-/ 
duce  a  wish  to  perpetuate  the  remembrance  of  them;  and  thereby  the  J 
personal  irritation  by  which  they  were  accompanied.  ^ 

Besides  these  reasons,  there  is  one  arising  from  the  desire  of  avoid- 
ing such  a  development  of  the  characters  of  agents,  as  might  induce 
the  relating  and  the  unintentional  mis-stating  of  what  may  have  passed 
in  unguarded  conversation.  It  is  an  unfair  advantage  taken  of  a  de- 
ceased character,  for  an  author  to  represent  him  as  his  own  prejudices 
or  his  passions  dictate;  when,  perhaps,  the  other  party  would  have 
had  the  precaution  to  make  his  own  story  known,  had  he  foreseen 
such  a  result  of  the  freedom  of  social  intercourse. 

Another  license  which  has  grown  out  of  the  adopted  plan,  is  the 
anticipating  of  some  circumstances  which  took  place  in  England,  dur- 
ing the  intercourse  with  his  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury;  when 
such  anticipation  might  illustrate  any  matter  previously  under  review. 


PREFACE    TO    THE    FIRST  EDITION.  5 

The  motive,  was  the  desire  to  record  the  said  intercourse  in  the  form 
in  which  it  now  appears,  that  is,  in  letters  to  the  committee  of  the 
Church  in  Pennsylvania;  which,  having  been  written  when  the  mat- 
ters related  were  fresh  on  the  mind  of  the  narrator,  is  the  more  likely 
to  be  a  faithful  exhibition  of  them.  To  have  enlarged  the  letters 
would  have  been  incorrect;  and  yet,  in  what  passed  in  the  intercourse, 
there  was  such  connection  with  some  points  in  an  earlier  part  of  the 
work,  as  was  too  material  to  be  disregarded.  Although  there  has  not 
been  an  enlargement  of  the  letters,  nor  an  alteration  of  them  in  any 
instance,  there  have  been  attached  to  them  a  few  notes,  containing 
matters  of  less  moment 

The  motive  of  the  author  in  the  Statements,  is  principally  to  record 
facts,  which  may  otherwise  be  swept  into  oblivion  by  the  lapse  of  time. 
For  the  mixing  of  his  opinions  with  the  facts,  a  reason  may  be  thought 
due.  It  is,  that  the  habits  of  his  life  having  exercised  him  much,  on 
subjects  which  have  bearings  on  the  concerns  of  the  Church  in  doc- 
trine, in  discipline,  and  in  worship;  and  his  principles  having  been 
formed  with  deliberation,  and  acted  on  with  perseverence,  not  with- 
out prayer  to  the  Father  of  Lights  for  His  holy  guidance;  there  seems 
to  him  nothing  unreasonable  in  the  wish,  to  give  the  weight  of  long 
observation,  to  what  are  truth  and  order  in  his  esteem.  He'  has  not 
the  presumption  to  aspire  to,  nor  the  vanity  to  expect  to  share  in  the 
direction  of  the  concerns  of  the  Church,  after  the  very  few  years  in 
which  there  will  be  a  possibility  of  his  being  present  in  her  councils: 
but  he  commits  his  opinions,  to  the  issue  of  what  may  be  thought  in 
reason  due  to  them. 

On  the  author's  review  of  his  Statements  and  Remarks,  he  had  often 
a  painful  sensation  of  the  frequent  prominence  in  them  of  himself. 
In  the  way  of  apology,  let  it  be  remarked — first,  that  the  apparent 
fault  is  in  a  great  degree  inseparable  from  the  delivery  of  the  results 
of  personal  observation;  and,  secondly,  that  he  has  had  more  agency 
than  any  other  person,  in  the  transactions  recorded :  owing  to  the  cir- 
cumstances in  which  he  was  placed;  to  a  cause  for  which  he  can  not 


6  PREFACE    TO   THE   FIRST  EDITION1. 

be  sufficiently  thankful,  the  continuance  of  his  health  and  strength; 
and  to  his  having  attended  every  General  Convention,  from  the  be- 
ginning to  the  present  time.  Under  the  weight  of  these  considera- 
tions, he  commits  himself  to  the  candor  of  the  reader. 

Of  the  papers  in  the  Appendix,  a  great  proportion  are  what  may 
be  read  in  the  printed  journals;  but  they  were  thought  necessary  to 
the  series  of  the  events  presented.  Those  papers  which  were  in  the 
private  possession  of  the  author,  and  were  designed  to  have  an  influ- 
ence on  the  concerns  of  the  Church,  he  has  thought  it  due  to  the  ob- 
ject of  this  work,  to  perpetuate.  The  printing  of  any  document 
which  took  the  shape  of  a  canon,  has  been  judged  unnecessary. 

In  regard  to  letters,  let  it  be  noticed,  that  there  are  none  besides 
those,  which,  like  the  papers  above  referred  to,  were  designed  to  have 
public  influence.  In  private  letters,  there  is  much  to  confirm  the 
statements  made,  and  to  enlarge  them,  if  that  were  the  design. 


PEEFAOE 

TO 

THE    SECOND    EDITION. 


THE  Memoirs  of  the  Episcopal  Church  edited  some  years  ago  by 
the  present  author,  being  out  of  print;  and  there  being  none  on 
hand  so  far  as  is  known  to  him,  except  a  few  copies  in  his  posses- 
sion; he  lays  by  the  following  sheets,  under  the  idea,  that  in  the 
event  of  a  future  reprint,  they  may  be  thought  a  desirable  addition 
to  the  volume.  It  will  then  contain  whatever  relates  materially  to 
the  concerns  of  the  Episcopal  Church  for  the  space  of  fifty-two 
years;  of  which  the  former  publication  was  devoted  to  the  first 
thirty;  and  the  present  is  limited  to  the  remaining  twenty-two. 

The  author  can  not  expect,  at  his  time  of  life,  that  he  will 
much  longer  live  to  be  present  at  the  councils  of  the  Church;  or 
that,  if  living,  his  mind  will  be  competent  to  the  continuation  of 
the  present  work.  Accordingly,  in  these  considerations,  he  per- 
ceives a  call  on  him,  to  say,  in  accordance  with  a  sentiment  of  the 
Mantuan  poet — "Claudite  jam  Rivos." 

To  whatever  period  the  days  of  his  earthly  pilgrimage  may  be 
extended;  and  whatever  may  be  the  dispensations  of  Providence  in 
the  course  of  them;  whether,  as  hitherto,  the  uninterrupted  enjoy- 
ment of  health,  and  a  considerable  measure  of  worldly  comforts;  or 
such  visitations,  as  he  has  witnessed  in  the  persons  of  many,  whose 
merits  and  usefulness,  had  they  been  the  rule  of  divine  procedure,  in 
this  life  of  uncertainty  of  change,  as  they  are  not,  are  far  beyond  what 
can  be  supposed  his  own;  it  will  be  his  endeavor  and  his  prayer,  that 
he  may  live  in  daily  dependence  on  the  gracious  Providence  which 


8  PREFACE    TO    THE   SECOND  EDITION. 

has  conducted  him  to  an  advance  in  years  beyond  that  of  the  usual 
lot  of  man;  and  under  the  assurance,  that  if  there  should  be  for 
him,  in  reserve,  any  portion  of  bodily  suffering  or  of  sorrow,  it  will 
be  sent  in  mercy,  and  will  be  no  more  than  is  necessary  for  the  cor- 
rection of  his  frailties. 

Whether  prosperity  or  adversity  be  his  appointed  lot,  he  is  sure, 
that  if  his  reason  should  be  continued  to  him,  his  life  will  not  end, 
without  prayer  for  the  Church,  in  the  concerns  of  which  he  has 
been  so  long  engaged;  and  especially  for  the  divine  blessing  on 
her  ministry  and  her  institutions;  to  be  manifested  in  the  conver- 
sion of  sinners,  in  the  edification  of  the  godly,  and  in  the  end  of 
both — the  glory  of  God,  and  the  enlargement  of  the  kingdom  of  His 
Son,  the  adorable  Redeemer. 

April,   1836. 


CONTENTS. 


I.    NARRATIVE    OF   THE    ORGANIZATION    AND    OF   THE    EARLY 
MEASURES   OF   THE   PROTESTANT   EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 

Page 
State  of  the  Church  before  the  Revolutionary  War,  and  at  the  conclusion 

of  it 13 

Intercourse  with  Denmark  ..........  17 

A  Meeting  in  New  Brunswick,  New  Jersey  .......  19 

A  Meeting  in  New  York 19 

Convention  of  1785 20 

1786 24 

Consecration  of  Bishops  White  and  Provoost 25 

Convention  of  1789 27 

I792 3° 

1795 30 

1799 3» 

1801 31 

1804 33, 

1808 34 

1811 35 

1814 37 

1817 41 

1820 46 

1821 51 

1823 53 

1826 56 

1829 60 

1832 65 

1835 7<> 

II.  ADDITIONAL  STATEMENTS  AND   REMARKS. 

Of  the  Question  of  American  Episcopacy,  as  agitated  in  the  Colonies  .  .  73 
Of  the  Question  of  using  the  Liturgy,  exclusively  of  the  Prayers  for  the 

King  and  the  Royal  Family  .........  82 

Of  the  Meeting  in  New  Brunswick,  in  May,  1 784 83 

Of  the  Meeting  in  New  York,  in  October,  1784 86 

Of  Proceedings  in  sundry  States,  previous  to  the  Meetings  in  1784,  at  New 

Brunswick  and  at  New  York  .........  89 


10  CONTENTS. 

Page 
Of  the  General  Convention,  in  Philadelphia,  in  September  and  October, 

1785 ;        .        .  107 

Of  the  Convention  in  Philadelphia  and  Wilmington,  in  1 786        .        .        .  130 

Of  Personal  Intercourse  with  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury         .         .         .  142 

Of  the  Convention  in  1789 161 

1792 187 

1795 2«> 

1799 207 

iSoi 210 

1804 221 

1808 226 

1811 247 

1814 256 

1817 266 

Postscript 274 

Of  the  Convention  of  1820 281 

1821 290 

1823 295 

1826 299 

1829 309 

1832 313 

1835 319 

Conclusion 324 

III.  AN  APPENDIX   OF  ORIGINAL  PAPERS. 

Communication  with  the  Court  of  Denmark         ......  327 

Communication  of  the  Clergy  of  Connecticut,  to  the  Archbishop  of  York      .  330 
A  Letter  from  the  Rev.  Abraham  Jarvis,  in  the  Name  of  the  Clergy  of 

Connecticut     .         .         .         . 336 

A  Letter  from  the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  Seabury,  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith        .  340 

Address  of  the  Convention  of  1785,  to  the  English  Prelates  ....  348 

Letter  of  the  English  Prelates 353 

A  Memorial  from  the  Convention  in  New  Jersey,  to  the  General  Conven- 
tion of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States  of  America, 

to  be  held  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia  in  June  next 355 

Second  Address  to  the  English  Prelates 358 

Communications  from  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York   .         .         .  360 

Communication  from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 367 

Address  to  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York 369 

A  Letter  from  Granville  Sharp,  Esq.,  to  Dr.  Benjamin  Franklin,  with 

Extracts  of  Letters 370 

An  Act  of  the  General  Convention  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  States  of  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  and  South  Carolina,  held  at  Wilmington,  in 

the  State  of  Delaware,  on  Wednesday,  the  nth  of  October,  1786      .        .  378 


CONTENTS.  1 1 

Page 

Instrument  of  Consecration          .         .         .         .         .         .         •         •  3%l 

Note  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 3&6 

Letters  from  the  President  of  Congress  (Richard  Henry  Lee,  Esq.),  and 
from  the  Minister  of  the  United  States  at  the  Court  of  Great  Britain 
(John  Adams,  Esq.),  and  from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  Mr. 
Adams:  also  Certificates  from  the  Executive  of  Pennsylvania  and  Vir- 
ginia    3^6 

Letter  from  Richard  Peters,  Esq 392 

An  Act  of  the  Clergy  of  Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire         .         .         .  395 
An  Address  to  the  Most   Reverend  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 

York 398 

A  General  Constitution  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 

States  of  America 402 

A  Letter  from  the  Rev.  Dr.  Coke,  and  the  Answer 408 

Testimonial  of  the  Rev.  Charles  Pettigrew 414 

Circular  of  a  Committee  in  South  Carolina 415 

A  Letter  from  Bishop  Provoost,  and  the  Determination  of  the  Bishops          .  418 

Forms  of  Subscription 419 

Decision  of  the  Bishops  on  the  Case  of  Ammi  Rogers 420 

Of  the  Homilies 421 

Concerning  Posture  during  Psalmody 422 

Of  a  Proposal  of  new  Anthems,  and  of  Sanction  requested  in  favor  of  a 

proposed  Book         ...........  422 

Concerning  the  Identity  of  this  Church  with  the  former  Church  of  England 

in  America      ............  424 

Concerning  certain  Amusements 425 

Acts  of  the  Convention  of  1 785 428 

Of  the  Office  of  Confirmation 449 

Concerning  the  last  Rubric  in  the  Communion  Service          ....  450 
Thoughts  on  the  Proposal  of  Alterations  in  the  Book  of  Psalms  in  Metre, 
and  in  the  Hymns,  now  before  a  Committee  of  the  General  Convention  : 

By  a  Member  of  the  Committee 457 

Constitution  of  the  Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  as  established 

in  1820,  and  amended  in  1823,  1829,  1832,  and  1835        ....  461 

Concerning  the  Division  of  Dioceses 464 


I. 

A   NARRATIVE 


ORGANIZATION   AND   OF    THE    EARLY   MEASURES   OF 
THE  CHURCH. 


ALTHOUGH  it  happened,  as  might  be  expected,  that  a 
proportion  of  the  settlers  of  English  America  were  of  the 
profession  established  in  England;  yet  the  number  was  not 
so  considerable  as  might  be  supposed  from  the  existing 
relation;  owing  probably  to  the  circumstance,  that  several 
of  the  colonies  arose  in  a  great  measure  from  dissatisfaction 
with  the  establishment  at  home,  and  partly  to  an  influx  of 
subsequent  settlers,  not  only  from  other  countries,  subject 
to  the  same  crown,  but  also  from  countries  on  the  continent 
of  Europe;  principally  some  of  the  states  of  Germany.  In 
the  northern  and  eastern  states,  the  comparatively  small 
number  of  the  Church  of  England  may  be  seen  in  the  fact, 
that  when  the  revolutionary  war  began,  there  were  not 
more  than  about  eighty  parochial  clergymen  of  that  Church 
to  the  northward  and  to  the  eastward  of  Maryland;  and 
that  those  clergymen  derived  the  greater  part  of  their 
subsistence  from  the  society  instituted  in  England,  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts;  with  the  ex- 
ception of  those  resident  in  the  towns  of  Boston  and  New- 
port, and  the  cities  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia;  there 
being  no  Episcopal  congregations  out  of  those  towns  and 
cities,  held  to  be  of  ability  to  support  clergymen  of  them- 


14  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

selves.*  In  Maryland  and  in  Virginia  the  Episcopal  Church 
was  much  more  numerous,  and  had  legal  establishments 
for  its  support.  It  was  especially  numerous  in  those  parts 
of  the  said  provinces  which  were  settled  when  the  establish- 
ments took  place;  for  in  the  more  recently  settled  counties, 
the  mass  of  the  people  were  of  other  communions,  scarcely 
known  among  them  in  the  early  period  of  their  histories. 
In  the  more  southern  colonies,  the  Episcopalians  were 
fewer  in  proportion  than  in  the  two  last  mentioned;  but 
more  than  in  the  northern. 

It  may  be  supposed,  that  however  comparatively  few 
the  original  emigrants  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the 
northern  and  the  middle  colonies,  yet  they  must  have 
derived  aid  from  the  executive  of  the  parent  state,  through 
the  medium  of  its  representatives,  the  governors.  This 
was,  indeed,  the  case  in  a  degree;  but  the  aid  was  incon- 
siderable, and  confined  to  two  or  three  of  the  earliest  seats 
of  population.  Besides,  it  may  well  be  doubted,  whether, 
under  the  continually  existing  jealousy  in  the  colonies  of 
the  parent  power,  there  did  not  result  some  disadvantage 
to  a  denomination  comparatively  small,  from  a  community  of 
profession :  for  this  circumstance  may  have  had  a  tendency 
to  render  the  denomination  unpopular  among  a  great  propor- 
tion of  their  fellow-citizens;  especially  under  the  apprehen- 
sion that  it  might,  at  some  future  day,  be  an  engine  aiding 
in  the  introduction  of  a  new  system  of  colonial  government.! 

But  even  if  the  Episcopal  Church  found  any  source  of  in- 
crease in  the  connection,  this  was  more  than  counterbal- 
anced by  the  peculiar  circumstances  under  which  it  existed; 
which  prevented,  and  probably,  under  the  old  regimen, 
would  have  continued  to  prevent  its  organization.  Sep- 

*  The  clergy  in  the  province  of  Pennsylvania,  exclusive  of  those  in  the  City  of 
PhHadelphia,  were  never  more  than  six  in  number;  all  of  whom  were  missiona- 
ries, receiving  salaries  from  England.  The  parochial  clergy  of  the  city  were  four. 

t  Perhaps  the  only  considerable  endowment  by  the  English  government  was 
of  lands  to  Trinity  Church,  New  York.  Its  being  considerable,  is  owing  to  its 
having  become  of  great  value  by  the  increase  of  that  city.  =  « 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  15 

arated  by  the  Atlantic  ocean  from  the  Episcopacy,  under 
which  it  had  been  planted,  it  had  no  resource  for  a  minis- 
try, but  in  emigration  from  the  mother  country,  and  by 
sending  its  candidates  for  the  ministry  to  that  country  for 
Orders.  The  first  could  not  be  the  channel  of  a  respectable 
permanent  supply.  And  the  second,  which  was  the  most 
depended  on  in  the  latter  years  of  the  colonies,  was  very 
troublesome  and  expensive.  The  evil  of  the  want  of  an 
internal  Episcopacy  did  not  end  here.  For  although  the 
Bishop  of  London  was  considered  as  the  diocesan  of  the 
Episcopal  churches  in  America,  it  is  evident,  that  his  au- 
thority could  not  be  effectually  exerted,  at  such  a  distance, 
for  the  removing  of  unworthy  clergymen;  besides  which, 
there  were  civil  institutions  supposed  to  be  in  opposition 
to  it,  in  the  provinces  where  establishments  had  been  pro- 
vided^ In  Maryland,  in  particular,  all  injterference  of  the  \ 
Bishop  of  London,  except  in  the  single  matter  of  ordina-  ^ 
tion,  was  held  by  the  proprietary  government  to  be  an  en- 
croachment on  its  authorities.* 

For  these  reasons,  and  on  the  ground  of  the  evident 
propriety  of  being  supplied  with  all  the  orders  of  the  minis- 
try, recognized  by  their  ecclesiastical  system,  application 
had  been  made  to  England,  at  different  times,  by  the 
clergy,  especially  those  in  the  northern  colonies,  for  the 
obtaining  of  an  Episcopate.  These  applications  had  pro- 
duced much  contention  in  pamphlets  and  in  newspapers; 

*  The  author,  before  his  being  in  the  ministry,  knew  a  gentleman  (the  Rev. 

Mr.  Edminston)  who,  being  in  London  for  Orders,  had  brought  with  him  such 

recommendations  to  Lord   Baltimore,  proprietary  of  Maryland,   as  induced  the 

promise  of  an  order  to  his  governor,  for  any  future  parish  that  might  be  vacant. 

It  was  necessary  after  ordination,  to  show  the  testimonial  of  the  transaction  to  the 

,  proprietary:   who,   perceiving  with   the   instrument  a  license   to  preach  in  the 

I  province  of^Maryland,  was  much  dissatisfied  with  the  Bishop  of  London  on  that 

t  account.     The  bishop  usually  gave  such  a  license,  according  to  the  province  for 

which  the  party  was  ordained:  a  practice  similar  to  what  obtains  in  England. 

From  this,  and  from  other  circumstances,  the  conviction  is  felt,  that  his  lordship 

would  not  have  endured  in  his  province  any  Episcopal  authority  distinct  from 

his  designation  of  the  person.     It  is  mentioned,  as  one  of  the  difficulties  attendant 

on  the  subject  of  an  American  Episcopacy. 


1 6  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  writers  on  the  Episcopal  side  pleading  the  reasonable- 
ness of  being  indulged  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  their  relig- 

i  ion;  and  their  opponents  objecting,  that  bishops,  sent  from 
England  to  America,  would  of  course  bring  with  them,  or, 

\  if  not,  might  be  clothed  by  the  paramount  authority  of 
Britain,  with  the  powers  of  English  bishops,  to  the  great 
prejudice  of  people  of  other  communions,  and  in  contra- 
riety to  the  principles  on  which  the_settlement  of  thecoTo- 
nies  had  taken  place.  What  would  have  been  the  event, 
in  this  respect,  had  the  Episcopal  clergy  succeeded  in  their 

|  desires,  is  a  problem,  which  it  will  be  forever  impossible  to 

\  solve.  In  regard  to  the  motives  of  the  parties  in  the  dis- 
pute, there  are  circumstances  which  charity  may  apply 
to  the  most  favorable  interpretation.  As  the  Episcopal 
clergy  disclaimed  the  designs  and  the  expectations  of 
which  they  were  accused;  and  as  the  same  was  done  by 
their  advocates  on  the  other  side  of  the  water,  particularly 
by  the  principal  of  them,  the  great  and  good  Archbishop 
Seeker,  they  ought  to  be  supposed  to  have  had  in  view  an 
Episcopacy  purely  religious.  On  the  other  hand,  as  their 
opponents  laid  aside  their  resistance  of  the  religious  partf 
of  it,  as  soon  as  American  independence  had  done  away  all 
political  danger,  if  it  before  existed,  it  ought  to  be  be- 
lieved, that  in  their  former  professed  apprehensions  theyi 
were  sincere,  a* 

If  such  was  the  difficulty  of  being  suppliedtwith  a  min- 
istry during  the  acknowledged  supremacy  of  the  British 
crown,  much  greater,  as  may  be  supposed,  was  the  same 
difficulty  during  the  struggle  which  ended  in  the  elevat- 
ing  of  the   colonies  .to   the   rank   of  independent   states. 
During  that  term,  there  was  no  resource  for  the  supply  of 
vacancies;  which  were  continually  multiplying,  ri^ot   only 
,  from  death,  but  by  the  retreat  of  very  many  of  the  Episco- 
pal clergy  to  the  mother  country,  and  to  the  colonies  still 
|  dependent  on  her.     To   add  to  the  evil,  many  able  and 

*  These  letters  refer  to  corresponding  letters  in  Part  II.,  Additional  Statements. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  17 

worthy  ministers,  cherishing  their  allegiance  to  the  king 
of  Great  Britain,  and  entertaining  conscientious  scruples 
against  the  use  of  the  liturgy,  under  the  restriction  of  omit- 
ting  the   appointed   prayers   for   him,   ceased   to   officiate.        i^j^ 
Owing  to  these  circumstances,  the  doors  of  the  far  greater  I  '^MSM**/* 
number  of  the  Episcopal  churches  were  closed  for  seVeral  ; 
years.     In  the  State  in  which  this  work  is  edited,  there  was   '  ftL  -//A 
a  part  of  that  time  in  which  there  was,  through  its  whole    * 
extent,  but  one_resident  minister  of  the  church  in  question, 
he  who  records  the  fact.     b. 

No  sooner  was  it  known  in  America,  that  Great  Britain 
had  acknowledged  her  independence,  than  a  few  young 
gentlemen  to  the  southward,  who  had  been  educated  for 
the  ministry,  but  kept  back  from  it  by  the  times,  embarked 
for  England,  and  applied  to  the  then  Bishop  of  London,  Dr. 
Lowth,  for  Orders.  As  the  Bishop  could  not  ordain  them, 
witfio"ut  requiring  of  them  engagements  inconsistent  with 
their  allegiance  to  the  American  sovereignty,  he  applied 
for,  and  obtained,  an  act  of  parliament,  allowing  him  to 
dispense  with  requisitions  of  that  sort.  While  this  matter 
was  depending,  and  the  success  of  the  candidates  was 
doubtful,  there  was  an  incident,  which  it  may  be  proper  to 
record,  in  justice  to  the  intended  good  offices  of  a  foreign 
sister  church. 

Mr.  Adams,  then  the  minister  of  the  United  States  at 
the  court  of  St.  James,  being  in  company  with  M.  de  St. 
Saphorin,  the  minister  of  the  crown  of  Denmark,  mentioned 
to  him  the  case  here  stated,  of  the  candidates  for  Orders, 
with  a  view  to  his  opinion,  whether  they  could  be  gratified 
in  the  kingdom  which  he  represented.  Some  time  after, 
the  Danish  minister  made  a  communication  to  the  Ameri- 
can, from  which  it  appeared,  that  the  inquiry  of  the  latter 
had  been  notified  to  the  Danish  court;  that  the  consequence 
had  been  a  reference  to  the  theological  faculty  of  the  king- 
dom; and  that  they  had  declared  their  readiness  to  ordain j 
candidates  from  America,  on  the  condition  of  their  signing 
of  the  Thirty_Miine  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  with 


1 8  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  exception  of  the  political  parts  of  them;  the  service  to 
be  performed  in  Latin,  in  accommodation  to  the  candi- 
dates, who  might  be  supposed  unacquainted  with  the  lan- 
guage of  the  country.  This  conduct  is  here  the  more 
cheerfully  mentioned  to  the  honor  of  the  Danish  Church, 
as  it  is  reasonable  to  presume,  that  there  would  have  been 
an  equal  readiness  to  the  consecrating  of  bishops,  had 
necessity  required  a  recourse  for  it  to  any  other  source 
than  the  English  Episcopacy,  under  which  the  American 
churches  had  been  planted.  The  proceeding  in  Denmark 
was  made  known  to  the  American  government  by  Mr. 
Adams;  a  copy  of  whose  letter  to  the  president  of  con- 
gress, was  sent  to  the  author  by  the  then  supreme  execu- 
tive council  of  Pennsylvania.  Mr.  Adams  stated,  that  the 
transaction  arose  from  his  having  been  applied  to  by  an 
American  gentleman,  in  behalf  of  the  candidates  for  ordi- 
nation referred  to.  Mr.  Adams  mentioned  the  matter  to 
M.  de  St.  Saphorin,  the  Danish  minister;  who  accordingly 
wrote  to  the  Count  de  Rosencrone,  privy  counsellor  and 
secretary  of  state  to  the  king  of  Denmark.  The  result  was 
as  above  given. 

In  truth,  there  was  no  idea  of  having  recourse,  in  the 
first  instance,  to  any  other  quarter  than  that  of  the  English 
Episcopacy,  in  the  minds  of  those  who  had  begun  to  direct 
their  attention  to  the  supply  of  the  present  and  the  future 
exigencies  of  the  churches.  But  it  seemed  to  those  at 
least  who  took  up  the  subject  in  the  middle  states,  that 
nothing  could  be  done  to  effect,  without  some  association, 
under  which  the  churches  might  act  as  a  body:  they  having 
been  heretofore  detached  from,  and  independent  on*  one 
another;  excepting  the  bond  of  union  which  had  subsisted 
through  the-  medium  of  the  Bishop  of  London.  That  me- 
dium of  connection  had  been  confessedly  destroyed  by  the 
revolution;  and  therefore  it  was  evident,  that  without  the 
creating  of  some  new  tie,  the  churches  in  the  different 

/ 

/ 

*  This  mode  of  expression  is  peculiar"  to  Bishop  White  and  frequently  occurs.   Ed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  19 

• 

states,  and  even  those  in  the  same  state,  might  adopt  such 
varying  measures  as  would  forever  prevent  their  being  com- 
bined in  one  communion. 

The  first  step  towards  the  forming  of  a  collective  body  • ' 
of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States,  was  taken 
at  a  meeting  for  another  purpose,  of  a  few  clergymen  of 
New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Pennsylvania,  at  Brunswick, 
in  Xew  Jersey,  on  the  I3th  and  141)1  of  May,  1/^4.*     These 
clergymen,   in  consequence  of  prior   correspondence,   had  ,-. 
met  for  the  purpose  of  consulting,  in  what  way  to  renew  a 
society  that  had  existed  under  charters  of  incorporation 
from  the  governors  of  the  said  fhree  states,  for  the  Support 
of^ Widows  and  Children  of  deceased  Clergymen.     Here  it      $_//  {"* 
was  determined,  to  procure  a  larger  meeting  on  the  fifth  of 
the  ensuing  October,  in  New  York;  not  only  for  the  pur- 
pose of  reviving  the  said  charitable  institution,  but  to  con- 
fer and  agree  on  some  general  principles  of  an  union  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  throughout  the  states,     c. 

Such  a  meeting  was  held,  at  the  time  and  place  agreed 
on:  and  although  the  members  composing  it  were  not 
vested  with  powers  adequate  to  the  present  exigencies  of 
the  Church,  they  happily,  and  with  great  unanimity,  laid 
down  a  few  general  principles,  to  be  recommended  in  the 
respective  states,  as  the  ground  on  which  a  future  ecclesi- 
astical government  should  be  established.  These  principles 
were  approbatory  of  Episcopacy  and  of  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer;  and  provided  for  a  representative  body  of  the 
Church,  consisting  of  clergy  and  laity;  who  were  to  vote 
as  distinct  orders.  There  was^also  a  recommendation  to 
the  Church  in  the  several  states,  to  send  clerical  and  lay 
deputies  to  a  meeting  to  be  held  in  Philadelphia,  on  the 
27th  of  September  in  the  following  year.  d. 


*  This  should  read  I  ith.  See  Bishop  Perry's  "  Reprint  of  Journals  of  General 
Convention,"  III.,  pp.  8-12,  (printed  at  Claremont,  1874).  Dr.  Beach  appears  to 
have  been  very  active  in  this  movement.  See  Note  C.  for  this  page,  and  "  Reprint 
of  Journals,"  III.,  8.  See  also  on  "Convention  Journals,"  in,  13,  and  21.  Ed, 


20  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Although  at  the  meeting  last  held,  there  were  present 
two  clergymen  from  the  eastern  states;  yet  it  now  ap- 
peared, that  there  was  no  probability,  for  the  present,  of 
the  aid  of  the  churches  in  those  states,  in  the  measures 
begun  for  the  obtaining  of  a  representative  body  of  the 
Church  at  large.  From  this  they  thought  themselves  re- 
strained in  Connecticut,  in  particular,  by  a  step  they  had 
antecedently  taken,  for  the  obtaining  of  an  Episcopate  from 
England.  For  until  the  event  of  their  application  could  be 
known,  it  naturally  seemed  to  them  inconsistent  to  do  any 
thing  which  might  change  the  ground  on  which  the  gen- 
tleman of  their  choice  was  then  standing.  This  gentleman 
was  the  Rev.  Samuel  Seabury,  D.D.,  formerly  missionary 
y-fon  Staten  Island,  who  had  been  recommended  to  England 
for  consecration  before  the  evacuation  of  New  York  by  the 
British  army. 

•On  the  27th  of  September,  1785,  there  assembled  agree- 
|\i^     ably  to  appointment,  in  Philadelphia,  a  convention  of  cler- 
ical and  lay  deputies,  from   seven  of  the  thirteen   United 


Jlr"^     ;      iv.cu    aiiu    \<\y    ucjjuiics,    iiuui    seven    ui    inc    LUII  iccu     »^IHICU 

States,  viz.,  from  New  York  to  Virginia,  inclusive,  with  the 
addition  of  South  Carolina.  They  applied  themselves  to 
the  making  of  such  alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  as  were  necessary  for  the  accommodating  of  it  to 
the  late  changes  in  the  state;  and  the  proposing,  but  not 
establishing,  of  such  other  alterations  in  that  book  and  in 
the  articles,  as  they  thought  an  improvement  of  the  service 
and  of  the  manner  of  stating  the  principal  articles  of  faith; 
these  were  published  in  a  book,  ever  since  known  by  the 
name  of  the  Proposed  Book.  e. 

The  convention  entered  on  the  business  of  the  Episco- 
pacy, with  the  knowledge  that  there  was  now  a  bishop  in 
.\   Connecticut,  consecrated,  not  in  England,  but  by  the  non- 
•^f\     Jurmg  bishops  of  Scotland.     For  Dr-Seabury,  not  meeting 
assurance  of  success  with  the  bishops  of  the  former  coun- 
\)(*      %     try,  had  applied  to  the  latter  quarter  for  the  succession, 
ty    vC^     which  had  been  there  carefully  maintained;  notwithstand-"^ 
ing  their  severance  from  the  state  in  the  revolution  of  1688.  / 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  21 

Bishop  Seabury  had  returned  to  America,  and  had  entered 
on  the  exercise  of  his  new  function,  in  the  beginning  of 
the  preceding  summer,  and  two  or  three  gentlemen  of  the 
southern  states  had  received  ordination  from  his  hands. 
Nevertheless,  the  members  of  this  convention,  although 
generally  impressed  with  sentiments  of  respect  towards  the 
new  bishop,  and  although,  with  the  exception  of  a  few, 
alleging  nothing  against  the  validity  of  his  Episcopacy, 
thought  it  the  most  proper  to  direct  their  views  in  the  first 
instance  towards  England.  In  this  they  were  encouraged 
by  information  which  they  thought  authentic,  assigning  for 
Dr.  Seabury's  failure  these  two  reasons:  that  the  adminis- 
tration had  some  apprehension  of  embroiling  themselves 
with  the  American  government;  the  sovereignty  of  which 
they  had  so  recently  acknowledged;  and  that  the  bishops 
were  doubtful  how  far  the  act  of  some  clergymen,  in  their 
individual  capacities,  would  be  acquiesced  in  by  their  re- 
spective flocks.  For  the  meeting  of  the  former  difficulty,  it 
was  thought  easy  to  obtain,  and  there  were  afterwards  ob- 
tained, from  the  executive  authorities  of  the  states  in  which 
the  new  bishops  were  to  reside,  certificates,  that  what  was 
sought  did  not  interfere  with  any  civil  laws  or  constitutions. 
The  latter  difficulty  was  thought  sufficiently  obviated  by  the 
powers  under  which  the  present  convention  was  assembled. 
Accordingly,  they  addressed  the  archbishops  and  bishops 
of  England,  stating,  that  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  had  been  severed,  by  a  civil  revolution,  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  parent  Church  in  England;  acknowl- 
edging the  favors  formerly  received  from  the  bishops  of 
London  in  particular,  and  from  the  archbishops  and  bish- 
ops in  general,  through  the  medium  of  the  Society  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel;  declaring  their  desire  to  perpet- 
uate among  them  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  England, 
in  doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship;  and  praying,  that  their 
lordships  would  consecrate  to  the  Episcopacy  those  per- 
sons who  should  be  sent,  with  that  view,  from  the  churches' 
in  any  of  the  states  respectively. 


22  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

In  order  that  the  present  convention  might  be  succeeded 
by  bodies  of  the  like  description,  they  framed  an  ecclesias- 
tical constitution,  the  outlines  of  which  were,  that  there 
should  be  a  triennial  convention,  consisting  of  a  deputation 
from  .the  ^Church  in  each  state,  of  not  more  than  four 
clergymen,  and  as  many  laymen;  that  they  should  vote 
statewise,  each  order  to  have  a  negative  on  the  other;  that 
when  there  should  be  a  bishop  in  any  state,  he  should  be 
officially  a  member  of  the  convention;  that  the  different 
orders  of  clergy  should  be  accountable  to  the  ecclesiastical 
authority  in  tTie  state  only  to  which  they  should  respec- 
tively belong;  and  that  the  engagement  previous  to  ordi- 
nation sKould  be  a  declaration  of  belief  in  the  holy  Script- 
ures, and  a  promise  of  conformity  to  the  doctrines  and  the 
worship  of  the  Church. 

Further,  the  convention  appointed  a  committee,  with 
various  powers;  among  which  was,  that  of  corresponding, 
during  the  recess,  with  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of 
England;  and  they  adjourned,  to  meet  again  in  Philadel-' 
phia,  on  the  2Oth  of  June,  in  the  following  year. 

After  the  rising  of  the  convention,  their  address  to  the 
English  prelates  was  forwarded  by  the  committee  to  his 
'Excellency  John  Adams,  Esq.,  the  American  minister,  with 
the  request,  that  it  might  be  delivered  by  him  to  his  Grace 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  There  were  also  forwarded 
certificates  from  the  executives  of  the  states  in  which  there 
was  a  probability  of  there  being  bishops  chosen.  The  ex- 
ecutives who  gave  these  certificates  were  those  of  New 
York,  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  and  Virginia.  These  evi- 
dences, agreeably  to  instructions  of  the  convention,  were 
applied  for  by  the  members  of  that  body  from  the  said 
states  respectively.  Mr.  Adams  willingly  performed  the 
service  solicited  of  him,  and  in  a  conversation  which  he 
held  with  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  on  the  subject  of 
the  address,  gave  such  information,  and  expressed  such 
sentiments,  as  were  calculated  to  promote  the  object  of 
it.  / 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  23 

In  the  spring  of  the  year  1786  the  committee  received 
an  answer,  signed  by  the  two  archbishops,  and  eighteen  of  ^  ^ 
the  twenty-four  bishops  of  England,  acknowledging  the  A.-/ el 
receipt  of  what  they  were  pleased  to  call  the  Christian  and 
Brotherly  Address  of  the  Convention,  and  declaring  their 
wish  to  comply  with  the  desire  of  it;  but  delaying  measures 
to  the  effect,  until  there  should  be  laid  before  them  the 
alterations  which  had  been  made  by  the  convention:  it 
having  been  represented  to  the  bishops,  through  private 
channels,  that  the  alterations  were  essential  deviations 
from  the  Church  of  England,  either  IrfSoctrine  or  in 
discipline. 

Not  long  after  the  receipt  of  this  letter,  the  committee 
received  another  from  the  archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 
York,  to  whom  the  management  of  the  business  had  been 
left  by  their  brethren,  after  a  second  meeting  of  the  body, 
informing    [the   committee],    that   they   had   received   the 
edited  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  in  regard  to  which  they 
declared,  that  besides  their  seeing  of  no^occasion  for  some 
smaller  alterations,  which  they  do  not  specify,   they  are 
dissadsfied  with  the  omission  of  the  Nicene  and  the  Atha-    j  . 
nasian  Creeds,  and  of  jthe  Descent  into  Hell  in  the  Apos-        - 
ties'  Creed.     And  they  further  declare  their  disapprobation  j  A 
of  an  article  in  the  proposed  constitution,  which  seemed  toj 
them  to  subject  the  future  bishops  to  a  trial  by  the  pres-( 
byters  and  the  laymen,  in  the  respective  states.     This,  how- 
ever, does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  meaning  of  the  ar- 
ticle alluded  to;  which  expresses  no  more  than  that  laws 
for  the  trial  of  bishops  should  be  made,  not  by  the  general, 
but  by  each  state  ecclesiastical  representative.     The  prel- 
ates  went  on  to  inform   the   committee,   that  they  were 
likely  to  obtain  an  act  of  parliament,   enabling  them  to 
consecrate   for  America.     They,   however,   expected,  that  > 
before   they    should    proceed    under    the    act,    satisfaction  ) 
should   be  given  in  regard   to   the   majtters   stated.     The  ) 
same  communication  laid  down  what  would  be  required,  in 
regard  to  the  characters  individually,  who  should  be  sent 


24  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

for  consecration.  As  to  faith,  they  were  to  make  the  sub- 
scription which  the  American  Church  had  prescribed,  to 
future  candidates  for  Orders.  On  the  subject  of  learning, 
it  was  thought  disrespectful  to  the  persons  to  be  sent,  to 
subject  them  to  an  examination,  it  being  at  the  same 
time  trusted,  that  the  American  Church  would  be  aware 
of  the  disparagement  of  the  Episcopacy  which  would  be 
the  result  of  its  being  conferred  on  persons  not  sufficiently 
respectable  in  point  of  literary  qualification.  In  order  to  „ 
give  satisfaction  in  regard  to  the  religious  and  moral  char- 
acter of  each  person  to  be  sent,  the  archbishops  required,  , 
that  it  should  be  testified  by  the  convention  choosing  him;  ? 
and,  in  addition,  that  there  should  be  a  certificate  from  the 
General  Convention,  to  the  effect  that  they  knew  no  reason 
why  the  person  should  not  be  consecrated  to  the  Episcopal 
office.  These  determinations  are  given  as  the  result  of  a 
consultation  of  the  two  archbishops  and  fifteen  of  the 
bishops,  being  all  who  were  at  the  time  in  town.  Soon 
after  the  letter  from  the  two  archbishops,  there  came  one 
from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  alone,  enclosing  the  act 
of  parliament. 

After  the  receipt  of  the  first  of  the  letters  of  the  English 
prelates,  and  before  the  receipt  of  the  second,  the  General 
Convention  assembled,  agreeably  to  appointment,  in  Phila- 
delphia, on  the  2Oth  of  June,  1786.  The  principal  business 
transacted  by  them,  was  another  address  to  the  English 
prelates,  containing  an  acknowledgment  of  their  friendly 
and  affectionate  letter,  a  declaration  of  not  intending  to 
depart  from  the  doctrines  of  the  English  Church,  and  a 
determination  of  making  no  further  alterations  than  such 
as  either  arose  from  a  change  of  circumstances,  or  appeared 
conducive  to  union;  and  a  repetition  of  the  prayer  for  the 
succession.  Before  their  adjournment,  they  appointed  a 
committee,  with  power  to  reassemble  them,  if  thought 
expedient,  at  Wilmington,  in  the  State  of  Delaware. 

On  the  committee's  receipt  of  the  second  letter,  they 
summoned  the  convention  to  meet,  at  the  place  appointed, 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  25 

on  the  loth  of  October  following.     The  principal  matter 
which  occupied  the  body  when  assembled,  was  the  question, 
how  far  they  should  accommodate  to  the  requisitions  of  the  *. 
English  prelates. 

(/> 


I 


The   difficulty  concerning  the   offsnsi^  article   of  the 
constitution  had  been  done  away  before  the  arrival  of  the 
objection    of  the  archbishops.     This  objection,   as  already 
observed,  was  grounded  on  a  misapprehension  of  the  design 
of  the  article.     But  another  objection  had  been  made  within 
the  American  Church,  on  the  score  of  there  being  no  ex-  £ 
press  provision  for  the  presidency  of  a  bishop  in  conventions  < 
and  in  ecclesiastical  trials.     This  objection  had  gained  so 
much  ground,  that,  in  the  session  of  June,  it  had  been  fully 
satisfied;  which  had  more  than  done  away  the  ground  of 
the  censure  of  the  prelates.     The  omission  of  the  Nicene  ( 
Creed  had  been  generally  regretted;  and,   accordingly,  it  • 
was  now,  without  debate  or  difficulty,  restored  to  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  to  stand  after  the  Apostles'  Creed,  with 
permission  of  the  use  of  either.     The  clause  in  the  latter 
creed,  of  the  Descent  into  Hell,  occasioned  considerable  \ 
debate,  but  it  was  finally  restored.     The~*restoration"  of  the  ' 
Athanasian  Creed  was  negatived.     The  result  of  the  de- 
liberations  of  the   convention  was  addressed  to  the  two 
archbishops,  with  thanks  for  their  fatherly  attention  to  the 
Church,  especially   in    procuring  legal  permission  for  the 
conveying  of  the  succession. 

The  deputies  from  the  several  states  were  called  on, 
beginning  from  the  northward,  for  information,  whether 
any  persons  had  been  chosen  in  them  respectively,  to  pro- 
ceed to  England  for  consecration:  when  it  appeared,  that 
the  Rev.  Samuel  PrQyopst,  D.D.,  rector  of  Trinity  Church, 
in  the  City  of  New  York,  had  been  chosen  for  that  purpose 
by  the  convention  in  that  state;  that  the  Rev.  William 
White,_D.D.,  rector  of  Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's  in 
the  City  of  Philadelphia,  had  been  chosen  by  the  conven- 
tion in  Pennsylvania;  and  that  the  Rev.  David  Griffith, 
D.D.,  rector  of  Fairfax  Parish,  Virginia,  had  been  chosen 


26  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

by  the  convention  there.  Testimonials  in  their  favor  from 
the  conventions  in  the  respective  states,  agreeable  to  the 
form  prescribed  by  the  archbishops,  were  laid  before  the 
General  Convention,  who  immediately  signed,  in  favor  of 
each  of  the  bishops-elect,  a  testimonial,  according  to  the 
form  prescribed  to  them  by  the  same  authority.*  g. 

The  two  former  of  the  above-named  clergymen,  having 
embarked  together  early  in  the  next  month,  arrived  at 
Falmouth,  after  a  passage  of  eighteen  days.  On  their 
reaching  of  London,  they  were  introduced  to  his  Grace  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  by  his  Excellency  Mr.  Adams, 
who,  in  this  particular,  and  in  every  instance  in  which  his 
personal  attentions  could  be  either  of  use  or  an  evidence  of 
his  respect  and  kindness,  continued  to  manifest  his  concern 
for  the  interests  of  a  church,  of  which  he  was  not  a  member. 

Before  the  accomplishing  of  the  object  of  the  voyage, 
there  occurred  the  delay  of  a  few  weeks;  owing  to  the 
archbishop's  desire  of  previously  laying  before  the  bishops 
the  grounds  of  his  proceeding  to  the  accomplishment  of  the 
bu  iness,  in  the  early  stages  of  which  they  had  been  con- 
sulted. The  greater  number  of  them  were  at  their  dio- 
ceses, but  were  expected  to  be  in  town  at  the  ensuing 

*  Dr.  William  Smith  was  elected  Bishop  of  Maryland  in  1783,  but  the  election  ( 
was  never  confirmed.     From  the  statement  of  Bishop  White,  that  the  testimonials  \ 
of  Drs.  White,  Provoost,  and  Griffiths  were  "immediately  signed,"  it  might  appear 
as  though  no  direct  Issue  was  made  with  Dr.  Smith  by  the  convention,  but  else- 
where such  an  issue  is  indicated.     (See  "Journals  of  Convention,"  III.,  pp.  34,   '• 
216,  245,  268,  328;  and  "Wilson's  Memoirs,"  pp.    19,   20.)     Dr.   Smith,  it  is  < 
affirmed,  entertained  the  idea  of  obtaining  consecration;  and,  Nov.  27th,   1786,  , 
Mrs.  White  wrote  to  Dr.  White,  then  in  England,  that  Mr.  Styles  had  told  her  I 
that  Dr.  Smith  had  told  him  that  he  was  soon  to  go  to  Scotland  for  consecration,  , 
and  that  he  had  a  recommendation  signed  by  more  than  thirty  persons.     ("De-j 
scendants  of  Col.  Thomas  White,"  p.  165.)     Upon  what  ground  the  opposition  to  f 
Dr.  Smith  was  based  does  not  officially  appear.     Bishop  White  opposed  his  con-  ^    f 
formation,  but  the  objections  of  the  Bishop,  whatever  torm  they^nay  'have" taken,  /   ^r 
•  did  not  interfere  with  the  cordial  relations  that  always  existed  between  them.     It ' 
should  not  be  forgotten  that  the  act  of  parliament  contemplated  the  consecration 
of  only   three  bishops./" (See  "Churchman's  Magazine,"   1807,   p.  236.     Also 
Bishop  White's  Letters  of  Dec.  6th,  1786  and  June  2<Xh,  1787,  in  the  second 
division  of  the  present  work.)     Ed. 


Ji 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  27 

opening  of  parliament,  appointed  for  about  the  middle  of       j.rf   I  « 
January.     Very  soon  afterwards,  the  4th  of  February,  was  if. 
appointed  for  the  consecration. 

On  that  day,  and  in  the  chapel  of  the  archiepiscopal  pal- 
ace of  Lambeth,  Dr.  White  and  Dr.  Provoost  were  ordained 
and  consecrated  bishops,  by  the  Most  Rev.  John  Moore,  , 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  The  Most  Rev.  William  Mark-  . 
ham,  Archbishop  of  York,  presented.  And  the  bishops 
who  joined  with  the  two  archbishops  in  the  imposition  of 
hands,  were  the  Right  Rev.  Charles  Moss,  Bishop  of  Bath 
and  Wells,  and  the  Right  Rev.  John  Hinchliff,  Bishop  of 
Peterborough.  Before  the  end  of  the  same  month,  the 
newly  consecrated  bishops  sailed  from  Falmouth  for  New 
York,  where  they  arrived  on  Easter  Sunday,  April  the  7th, 
and  soon  afterwards  began  the  exercise  of  the  Episcopacy 
in  their  respective  dioceses,  h.  .  ^/-£ 

On  the  28th  of  July,  1789,  there  assembled  the  Triennial^ 
Convention,  by  whom  the  Episcopacy  of  Bishops  White  and 
Provoost,  of  whom  the  former  only  was  present,  the  latter 
being  detained  by  sickness,  was  duly  recognized.  At  this 
convention,  there  naturally  occurred  the  importance  of 
taking  measures  for  the  perpetuating  of  the  succession:  a 
matter  which  some  circumstances  had  subjected  to  con- 
'siderable  difficulty.  The  Rev.  Dr.  Griffith  had  been  pre-C 
vented  by  occurrences  in  his  domestic  situation,  from  prose-  - 
cuting  his  intended  voyage  to  England,  and  had  given  in] 
his  resignation  to  the  convention  in  Virginia.  In  conse- 
quence of  their  direction,  the  resignation  was  notified  to  the 
General  Convention,  on  the  first  day  of  their  entering  on 
business.  The  Doctor  himself  had  come  to  attend  it,  as- 
one  of  the  deputies  from  Virginia;  but  his  attendance  was 
prevented  by  sickness,  which  ended  in  his  dissolution  dur- 
ing the  session.  The  subject  of  perpetuating  the  succes- 
sion from  England,  with  the  relation  which  it  bore  to  the 
question  of  embracing  that  from  the  Scotch  Episcopacy, 
was  brought  into  view  by  a  measure  of  the  clergy  in 
Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire.  This  body  had  elect- 


28  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

ed  the  Rev.  Edward  Bass,  rector  of  St.  Paul's  Church  in 
Newburyport,  their  bishop;  and  had  addressed  a  letter  to 
the  bishops  in  Connecticut,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania, 
praying  them  to  unite  in  consecrating  him.     The  last  of 
these  bishops,  being  the  only  one  of  them  now  present  in 
convention,   laid   the   letter   addressed   to  him  before  the 
body,  intimating  his  sincere  wish  to  join  in  such  measures 
as  they  might  adopt,  for  the  forming  of  a  permanent  union 
with  the  churches  in  the  eastern  states,  but  at  the  same 
time  expressing  his  doubt  of  its  being  consistent  with  the 
t  faith  impliedly  pledged  to  the  English  prelates,  to  proceed 
ito  any  consecration,  without  first  obtaining  from  them  the 
'  number  held  in  their  Church  to  be  canonically  necessary  to 
'  such  an  act.     This  sentiment,  which  he  also  supposed  to  be 
entertained  by  the  gentleman  who  had  been  consecrated 
with   him,  was  duly  respected   by   the   body,  while   they 
manifested  an  earnest  desire  of  the  union  alluded  to;  and, 
I  with  a  view  to  it,  voted  their  opinion  in  favor  of  the  va- 
lidity of  Bishop  Seabury's  consecration,  in  which  their  pres- 
ident concurred. 

In  order  to  carry  the  sentiments  of  the  convention  into 
effect,  they  signified  their  request  to  the  two  bishops  con- 
secrated in  England,  that  they  would  unite  with  Bishop 
Seabury  in  the  consecration  of  Mr.  Bass;  and  they  framed 
an  address  to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  England,  re- 
questing their  approbation  of  the  measure,  for  the  removing 
of  any  difficulty  or  delicacy  which  might  remain  on  the 
minds  of  the  bishops  whom  they  had  already  consecrated. 
And  here  it  may  be  proper  to  record,  that  the  difficulty 
was  not  long  after  removed  in  another  way  by  the  conven- 
tion of  Virginia,  in  their  electing  of  the  Rev.  James  Madi- 
son, D.D.,  president  of  William  and  Mary  College,  Wil- 
liamsburg,  their  bishop;  and  by  his  being  consecrated  in 
England. 

At  the  present  session  of  the  General  Convention,  the 
constitution  formed  in  1786  was  reviewed  and  newly  mod- 
elled. The  principal  feature  now  given  to  it,  was  a  distri- 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  2$ 

bution  into  two  houses,  one  consisting  of  the  bishops,  and 
the  other  of  the  clerical  and  lay  deputies,  who  must  vote, 
when  required  by  the  clerical  o£  by  the  lay  representation 
from  any  state,  as  under  the  former  constitution,  by  orders. 
The  stated  meetings  were  to  be  on  the  second  Tuesday  in 
September  in  every  third  year;  but  intermediate  meetings 
might  be  called  by  the  bishogs. 

When  the  convention  adjourned,  it  was  to  the  2Qth 
of  September  following:  and  before  the  adjournment,  an 
invitation  was  given  by  them  to  Bishop  Seabury,  and 
to  their  brethren  generally  in  the  eastern  states,  to  be 
present  at  the  proposed  session,  with  a  view  to  a  perma- 
nent union. 

On  that  day  the  convention  reassembled,  when  it  ap- 
peared that  Bishop  Seabury,  with  sundry  of  the  clergy  from 
Massachusetts  and  Connecticut,  had  accepted  the  invitation 
given  them.  There  was  laid  before  the  convention,  and 
by  them  ordered  to  be  recorded,  evidence  'of  that  bishop's 
consecration;  which  had  been  performed  by  Bishops  Kil- 
gour,  Petrie,  and  Skinner,  of  the  non-juring  Church  in 
Scotland.  There  then  ensued  a  conference  between  a  com- 
mittee of  the  convention  and  the  clergy  from  the  eastern 
states;  the  result  of  which  was,  that,  after  one  alteration 
of  the  constitution  at  their  desire,  they  declared  their  ac- 
quiescence in  it,  and  gave  it  their  signatures  accordingly. 

It  had  been  provided  in  the  constitution,  that  the 
arrangement  of  two  houses  should  take  place,  as  soon 
as  three  bishops  should  belong  to  the  body.  This  cir- 
cumstance now  occurred,  although  there  were  present 
only  two  of  them,  who  accordingly  formed  the  House  of 
Bishops. 

The  two  houses  entered  on  a  review  of  the  liturgy,  the 
bishops  originating  alterations  in  some  services,  and  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  proposing  others.  The 
result  was  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  then  established, 
and  has  been  ever  since  used. 

Some   canons   had   been   passed  in  the   preceding  ses-   ] 


30  -  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

«  sion;  but  they  were  recqnsjdered  and  passed  with  sundry 
others,  which  continue  to  this  day  substantially  the  same; 
but  with  some  alterations  and  additions  by  succeeding 
conventions.  /. 

The  next  Triennial  Convention  was  held  in  the  City  of 
New  York,  in  the  autumn  of  1792,  at  which  were  present 
the  four  bishops  already  mentioned  to  have  been  conse- 
crated abroad.  Hitherto  there  had  been  no  consecration  in 
America;  but  at  this  convention,  although  nothing  further 
was  brought  before  them  from  Massachusetts,  relative  to 
Dr.  Bass,  the  deputies  from  Maryland  applied  to  the  as- 
sembled bishops  for  the  consecration  of  the  Rev.  Thomas 
John  Claggett,  D.D.,  who  had  been  electeomshop  by  the 
convention  of  that  state.  Dr.  Claggett  was  accordingly 
consecrated,  during  the  session  of  the  convention,  in  Trin- 
ity Church,  of  the  city  in  which  they  were  assembled.* 

The  bishops,  having  reviewed  the  ordinal  of  the  Church 
of  England,  proposed  a  few  alterations  in  it  to  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies;  principally  such  as  were 
necessary  for  the  accommodating  of  it  to  local  circum- 
stances. The  ordinal,  thus  reviewed,  is  now  the  established 
form  for  the  consecrating  of  bishops  and  the  ordaining  of 
p.'iests  and  deacons,  k. 

In  September,  1795,  there  was  held  another  Triennial 
Convention,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia;  at  which  were 
present  all  the  bishops,  exceptBishop  Seabury.  Besides 
other  matters  acted  on,  some  canons  were  made;  and  a 
service  was  ordered  for  the  consecrating  of  a  church  or 
./chapel.  It  is  substantially  the^safne  with  a  service  com- 
posed by  Bishop  Andrews,  in  the  reign  of  James  the  First; 
and  since  commonly  used  by  the  English  bishops  in  such 
consecration;  but  without  the  authority  of  convocation  or 
of  parliament.  During  the  session,  there  took  place  the 
'consecration  of  the  Rev._Robert  Smith,  D.D.,  rector  of 

.^>'  -*==       ^          _r 

•  Dr.  Claggett  was  consecrated  by  Bishop  Provoost,  who  presided  at  this  con- 
vention, assisted  by  Bishops  Seabury,  White,  and  MadisonT" 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  31 

St.  Philip's,  in  Charleston,  South  Carolina;  who  had  been 
elected  by  the  convention  in  that  state  their  bishop.*     /. 

Between  this  and  the  next  convention,  there  was  con- 
secrated  the  Rev.  Edward  Bass;  again  recommended  from 
Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire:  the  certificate  usually  ^yj/ifi 
given  on  such  occasions  by  the  General  Convention  being    ' 
in  this  instance  given  by  a  standing   committee  of  that 
body,  agreeably  to  a  provision  which  had  been   made  to 
that  effect.t  fl} 

And  on  the   i8th  of  October  of  the  same  year,  there 
was  consecrated,  in  Trinity  Church,   in  the  City  of  New   ,  ; 
Haven,  the  Rev.  Abraham  Jarvis,  D.D.,  for  the  State  of     ryp^ 
Connecticut.:}: 

There  would  have  been  a  convention  in  Philadelphia,  in  /  * 
September,  1798;  but  the  prevalence  of  epidemical  disease  »2 
preventing  th^ir  assembling, 'the  bishops,  agreeably  to  a 
power  vested  in  them  when  desired  by  a  standing  commit- 
tee of  the  convention,  summoned  that  body  to  meet,  in  the 
same  city,  on  the  nth  of  June,  1799.  On  this  occasion, 
the  review  of  the  articles  was  moved  in  the  House  of  Cler- 
ical and  Lay  Deputies.  And  a  committee  was  appointed, 
who  drew  up  a  body  of  articles;  which  were  not  acted  on, 
but  ordered  to  be  printed  on  the  journal,  as  a  report  of  a 
committee  of  one  of  the  houses,  to  lie  over  for  the  consid- 
eration of  the  next  convention;  which  was  appointed  to  be 
in  the  City  of  Trenton,  New  Jersey,  m. 

It  assembled  there,  in  September,  1801;  when  there  was' 
brought  before  the  bishops  present  at  it,  three  in  number, 
the  question  of  the  admissibility  of  a  resignation  of  the 
Episcopal  charge.  A  letter  from  Bishop  Provoost  had  been 

*  The  consecration  of  Dr.    Smith   was  by  the  presiding  bishop,   assisted  by 
Bishops  Provoost,  Madison,  and  Claggett. 

t  The  consecration  of  Dr.  Bass  was  in  Christ  Church  in  the  City  of  Philadel- 
phia, May  jth,  1797,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  assisted  by  Bishops  Provoost  and 
Clagget. 

J  The  consecration  of  Dr.  Jarvis  was  by  Bishop  White,  assisted  by  Bishops 
Provoost  and  Bass. 


32  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

addressed  to  one  of  the  bishops  present,  and  by  him  laid 
before  the  house,  stating,  that,  induced  by  ill  health  and 
some  circumstances  of  a  domestic  nature,  he  wished  to 
retire  from  all  public  employment;  and  had  therefore  re- 
signed, at_ajate  meeting  of  the  convention  in  New  York, 
his  jurisdiction  of  bishop  in  that  state.  In  consequence  of 
this  resignation,  the  Rev.  Benjamin  Moore,  D.D.,  who,  on 
account  of  Bishop  Provoost's  resignation  of  the  rectory  of 
Trinity  Church,  in  the  City  of  New  York,  had  been  chosen 
to  that  place,  was  also  elected  to  succeed  to  the  Episco- 
pacy. The  House  of  Bishops  having  taken  this  subject 
under  their  serious  consideration,  and  doubting  of  the  pro- 
priety of  sanctioning  Episcopal  resignation,  declined  any 
act  to  that  effect.  But  being  sensible  of  the  exigency  ex- 
isting in  the  State  of  New  York,  they  consented  to  the 
consecration  of  an  assistant  bishop;  it  being  understood, 
that  he  should  be  competent  in  point  of  character  to  all 
the  Episcopal  duties;  and,  that  the  extent  in  which  the 
same  were  to  be  discharged  by  him,  should  be  dependent 
on  such  regulations  as  expediency  might  dictate  to  the 
Church  in  New  York;  grounded  on  the  indisposition  of 
Bishop  Provoost,  and  with  his  concurrence.  Conformably 
with  the  line  of  conduct  thus  laid  down,  Dr.  Benjamin 
Moore,  being  duly  recommended,  was  consecrated  during 
the  session,  in  St.  Michael's  Church,  Trenton;  and  took- 
his  seat  in  the  House  of  Bishops. 

In  this  convention,  the  important  business  of  the  Arti- 
cles was  again  taken  up;  and  now,  for  the  first  time,  au- 
kthoritatively  acted  on.  After  repeated  discussions  and 
propositions,  it  had  been  found,  that  the  doctrines  of  the 
Gospel,  as  they  stand  in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  with  the  exception  of  such  matters  as 
are  local,*  were  more  likely  to  give  general  satisfaction 
than  the  same  doctrines  in  any  new  form  that  might  be 


*  Article  XXI.  was  omitted,  being  partly  Iccal  and  civil,  while  it  is  also  pro- 
vided for  in  other  Articles.     Ed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  33 

devised.  The  former  were  therefore  adopted  by  the  two 
houses  of  convention,  without  their  altering  of  even 
the  obsolete  diction  in  them;  but  with  notices  of  such 
changes  as  change  of  situation  had  rendered  necessary. 
Exclusively  of  such,  there  is  one  exception,  that  of  adapt- 
ing the  article  concerning  the  creeds,  to  the  former  exclu- 
sion of  the  Athanasian. 

It  is  further  to  be  remembered,  that,  in  regard  to  sub- 
scription to  the  articles,  there  is  a  considerable  difference 
between  the  form  required  in  the  Church  of  England,  as!  "     & 
laid  down  in  her  thirty-sixth  canon,  and  that  prescribed  in    ^  y^C*^ 
the  constitution  of  the  American  Church.     The  latter  form 
had  so  far  acquired  the  approbation  of  the  English  prelates, 
as  to  be  thought  sufficient  on  the  part  of  those  who  came 
to  them  for  consecration  from  America,     n. 

Throughout  this  Narrative,  it  must  have  appeared,  that 
the  object  kept  in  view,  in  all  the  consultations  held,  and 
the  determinations  formed,  was  the  perpetuating  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  on  the  ground  of  the  general  principles 
which  she  had  inherited  from  the  Church  of  England;  and 
of  not  departing  from  them,  except  sojar  as  either  local 
circumstances  required,  or  some  very  important  cause  ren- 
dered proper.  To  those  acquainted  with  the  system  of 
the  Church"  of  England,  it  must  be  evident,  that  the  ob- 
ject here  stated  was  accomplished  on  the  ratification  of  ; 
the  articles. 

The  next  Triennial  Convention  was  in  the  City  of  New 
York,  September  nth,  1804.  Canons  were  passed,  extend- 
ing to  a  greater  variety  of  objects  than  had  been  provided  l 
for  before.  An  office  was  framed  and  ordered  to  be  used,  ''L 
at  the  induction  of  ministers  to  the  rectorship  of  churches. 
A  course  of  ecclesiastical  studies  of  candidates  for  Orders, 
was  prescribed  by  the  bishops.  And  the  constitution  was 
altered,  agreeably  to  a  proposition  made  in  the  preceding 
convention,  and  notified  to  the  conventions  in  the  states, 
so  as  that  the  future  Triennial  Conventions  shall  be  in  the 
month  of  May,  instead  of  September.  During  the  session. 


34  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  Rev.  Samuel  Parker,  D.D.,  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  in 
Boston,  was  consecrated  bishop  in  Trinity  Church,  New 
York,  in  the  room  of  Bishop  Bass,  who  had  departed  this 
life.  There  had  also  died,  since  the  last  convention,  Bish- 

^  op  Smith,  of  South  Carolina.     And  it  was  understood,  that 
>fU*^- ." 


Rev.  Edward  Jenkins,  D.D.,  who  had  been  elected  to 
supply  his   place,   had   declined    the    station.      Since    the 
events  here  recorded,  Bishop  Parker  departed  this  life,  a 
v    i        few  months  after  his  consecration.  -  o. 

/j  »     v.         The  next  meeting  of  the  General  Convention  was  in  the 

,City  of  Baltimore,  from  May  i/th,  1808,  to  the  26th  of  the 

same  month.     Two  bishops  only  (Bishops  White  and  Clag- 

gett)  were  present  at  this  convention:  and  the  Church  in 

sever^states_only  was  represented. 

There  was  now  ratified  the  long  proposed  amendment  ' 
<  of  the   constitution;    annulling    the    provision,    by    which    ) 
i  four-fifths  of  the  House  ofCTTerical  and  Lay  Deputies  could  r 
accomplish  a  measure,  without  the  concurrence  of  the  House  \ 
of  Bishops. 

There  was  also  proposed  another  amendment  of  the/ 
constitution,  for  the  preventing  of  alterations  in  the  liturgy,  J 
unless  the  same  should  have  been  proposed  at  a  previous  [ 
convention. 

The  whole  body  of  the  canons  was  reviewed,  and  under- 
went considerable  alterations. 

A  committee  was  appointed,  to  address  the  Church  in\ 
the  different  states.  The  objects  in  view,  were  to  procure^ *, 
a  more  full  attendance  on  future  conventions,  and  to  ex-], 
tend  the  Episcopacy  to  the  western  states. 

"The  Office  of  Induction,"  established  by  the  last  con- 
vention, was  changed  in  name  to  "The  Office  of  Institu- 
tion," and  rested  on  recommendation,  not  on  requisition, 
as  before. 

The  sense  of  the  two  houses  was  given  on  two  points, 

~~—  *  -          ~ 

which  had  created  diversity  of  opinion  and  of  practice — 
/  Whether  a  minister  ought  to  officiate  at  the  funeral  of  any 
\  person  killed  in  a  duel;  and — Whether  a  minister  should 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  35 

unite  in  marriage  any  person  who  has  been  divorced;  un- 
less  it  be  on  account  of  the  other  party's  having  been 
guilty  of  adultery.  Both  these  questions  were  decided  in 
the  negative. 

There  was  also  introduced  into  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies,  on  recommendation  of  the  Church  in 
Maryland,  the  subject  of  marriage,  as  connected  with  the 
degrees  of  consanguinity  and  affinity.  But  on  communica- 
tion of  the  matter  to  the  House  of  Bishops,  it  was,  on  their 
recommendation,  referred  to  a  future  convention. 

Thirty  hymns  were  added  to  the  Book  of  Psalms  and 
Hymns. 

As  ordained  by  a  canon  of  the  last  convention,  a  pas- 
toral letter  from  the  House  of  Bishops  to  the  members  of 
this  Church  was  drawn  up  by  them,  communicated  to  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  and  there  read. 

On  the  rising  of  the  convention,  New  Haven,  in  the 
State  of  Connecticut,  was  appointed  as  the  next  place  of 
meeting.  The  session  was  ended,  by  an  attendance  on  the 
morning  service  of  the  day,  which  was  the  festival  of  the 
Ascension.  /. 

Agreeably  to  the  aforesaid  appointment,  the  next  Gen- 


eral Convention  was  held  in  the  City  of  New  Haven,  on 
Tuesday,  the  2 1st  of  May,  1811.  It  continued  in  session 
until  Friday,  the  24th.  Only  Bishops  White  and  Jarvis,  of 
the  House  of  Bishops,  were  present.  The  Church  in  nine 
states  was  represented. 

They  ratified  the  amendment  to  the  constitution  pro-  \  S-fJguJP 
posed  at  the  last  convention,  restraining  from  alterations  r 
of  the  liturgy,  except  such  as  may  be  proposed  at  one  con-  ) 
vention  and  determined  on  at  another. 

On  the  subject  of  the  canons,  nothing  was  done,  except 
the  repealing  of  the  last,  or  forty-sixth  of  the  canons,  as 
passed  at  the  last  convention,  entitled,  "Providing  for  mak- 
ing known  the  Constitution  and  Canons  of  the  Church." 

The  rule  prohibiting  the  officiating  at  the  funerals  of 
persons  killed  in  duels,  was  so  far  moderated,  as  to  allow  of 


36  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

/  the  same,  |f,_on  any  occasion,  the  party  in  question  had 
)  manifested  repentanceT" 

There  were  some  communications  made  in  regard  to  the 
western  churches,  and  the  extending  of  the  Episcopacy  to 
them;  but  a  plan  to  that  effect  was  not  yet  matured.  Fur- 
ther attention  to  the  subject  was  committed  to  the  bishops 
of  this  Church  in  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia. 

The  attendance  of  so  few  of  the  bishops;  three  of  the  ( 
four  absent  bishops  being  prevented  by  bodily  indisposition,  \ 
and  the  remaining  bishop  being  absent  by  indispensable 
engagements;  it  was  agreed  not  to  take  up,  at  present,  thef 
important  subject  of  marriages,  within  certain  degrees  of  j 
consanguinity  and  affinity. 

A  pastoral  address  was  sent  by  the  bishops  to  the  other 
house  to  be  printed  with  the  journal,  agreeably  to  a  requi- 
sition of  the  forty-fifth  canon. 

It  had  been  expected,  that  on  the  occasion  of  this  con- 
vention, there  would  have  been  a  consecration  of  two  bish- 
ops: of  the  Rev.  Dr.  John  Henry  Hobart,  chosen  assistant 
^  t  kn> bishop  for  the  State  of  New  York;  and  the  Rev.  Alexander 
'  ',.'•'  Viets  Gri^wold,  chosen  bishop  for  the  four  states  of  Massa- 
'chusetts,  New   Hampshire,   Vermont,   and    Rhode    Island. 
The  expectation  was  disappointed,  by  the  want  of  the  ca- 

„'  nonical  number  on  the  spot.     But  the  testimonials  of  the 
t'^ff  r 

r^.  bishops-elect  were  signed;  and  the  two  bishops  present  re- 
paired with  them  to  the  City  of  New  York;  where,  with  the 
assistance  of  the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  Provoost,  whose  indis- 
position, although,  with  difficulty,  permitted  his  attend- 
ance in  the  place  of  his  residence,  and  with  the  assistance 
of  Bishop  Jarvis,  the  consecration  was  performed,  by  the 
presiding  bishop,  on  the  29th  of  May,  in  Trinity  Church,  in 
•'  the  said  city. 

It  was  referred  to  the  presiding  bishop,  "to  address  a 
letter,  in  behalf  of  this  convention,  to  the  venerable  Soci- 
ety in  England  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign 
Parts,  informing  them  that  the  Church  in  the  State  of  Ver- 
•  mont  is  duly  organized,  and  in  union  with  the  Protestant 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  37 

Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States,  being  placed  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  New  Hampshire,  Massa- 
chusetts, Rhode  Island,  and  Vermont;  that  a  board  of 
trustees  of  donations  to  the  Church  has  been  incorporated 
in  the  State  of  Massachusetts;  and  that,  in  the  opinion  of 
this  convention,  the  society  may  safely  confide  the  care  of 
their  lands  in  Vermont  to  such  attorney  or  attorneys  as 
may  be  recommended  by  the  said  board  of  trustees,  and 
approved  of  by  the  ecclesiastical  convention  of  Vermont." 

When  the  convention  arose,  it  was  agreed  to  hold  the 
next  Triennial  Convention  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,     q. 

The  next  Triennial  Convention  was  held,  agreeably  to 
appointment  of  that  of  1811,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia, 
from  Tuesday,  the  i/th  of  May,  to  Tuesday,  the  24th  of  ^  ^ 
the  same  month,  in  the  year  1814.     The  bishops  present 
at  it  were,  Bishop  White,  of  the  Church  in  Pennsylvania;    \  , 
Bishop  Hobart,  the  assistant  bishop  of  the  Church  in  New 
f  1,  York;    Bishop  Griswold,   of  the  Eastern   Diocese;    Bishop 

*  *  Dehon,   of  South  Carolina;*  and,   the  second  day  of  the  kl*~ 
session,  Bishop  Richard  C.  Moore,  of  Virginia. 

In  the  last  mentioned  state,  the  Church  had  been  for 
many  years,  more  and  more  under  a  decline.  On  the  de- 
cease of  Bishop  Madison,  there  had  ensued  a  difficulty  in 
the  choice  of  a  successor,  until  a  few  gentlemen,  some  of 
the  clerical  and  some  of  the  lay  order,  suggested  the  choice 
of  the  gentleman  mentioned  above,  who  had  acquired  con- 
siderable popularity  in  the  City  of  New  York;  wherein  there 
was  a  large  congregation  under  his  ministry.  The  defect 
of  Episcopal  maintenance  was  expected  to  be  surmounted, 
by  connecting  the  office  of  bishop  with  that  of  the  rectory 
of  a  church  recently  erected  in  the  City  of  Richmond,  on  .  o  .  / 
the  site  of  a  theatre,  destroyed  a  few  years  before  by  a  fire, 

wherein  a-jxmsiderable  proportion  of  the  inhabitants  had    £ 

'  " /• 

*  Bishop  Dehon  had  been  consecrated,  October  I5th,  1812,  in  Christ  Church, 
in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  assisted  by  Bishops  Jarvis  and 
Hobart. 


38  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

been  consumed.  The  requisite  testimonials  having  been 
furnished,  Dr.  Moore  was  consecrated  in  St.  James'  Church, 
Philadelphia,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  assisted  by  Bishops 
Hobart,  Griswold,  and  Dehon.  The  sermon  preached  at 
the  opening  of  the  convention,  serving  for  the  consecration 
also,  was  by  Bishop  Hobart,  of  New  York.  He  supplied 
the  place  of  Bishop  Claggett,  of  Maryland,  who  was  kept 
away  by  indisposition. 

There  were  three  canons  passed  at  this  convention. 
One  of  them  was  concerning  the  alms  and  contributions  at 
the  holy  communion.  They  are  subjected  to  the  distribu- 
tion of  the  minister,  or  such  person  as  they  may  be  com- 
mitted to  by  him.  The  provision  was  designed  to  limit 
munificence  of  this  description  to  poor  communicants,  and 
to  sustain  a  pastoral  intercourse  with  them.  The  cause  of 
interposition  in  this  matter  was  some  proposals  of  appro- 
priation said  to  have  been  made,  for  Church  purposes  in- 
deed, but  wide  of  the  original  design  of  the^  oblations  at  the 
Lord's  table. 

The  next  canon  was  explanatory  of  the  twenty-ninth, 
guarding  against  the  effect  of  its  excluding  from  diocesan 
conventions  and  votes  in  the  choice  of  bishops,  of  unin- 
stituted  ministers  and  deacons,  where  these  are  not  ex- 
clu3ed  by  the  respective  diocesan  constitutions;  and  fur- 
ther, against  the  extending  of  the  Office  of  Institution 
to  gatherings  of  persons  not  bound  together  by  a  common 
interest  in  a  place  of  worship. 

The  remaining  canon  was  a  repeal  of  so  much  of  the 
forty-fifth,  as  requires  the  reading,  in  the  General  Conven- 
tion, of  the  parochial  reports  entered  on  the  journals  of  the 
different  state  conventions.  The  design  of  this,  was  to 
devolve  on  the  Church  in  each  state,  the  prej3anng_of_a 
report  of  its  concerns.  Accordingly,  this  was  provided  for 
by  a  separate  resolve. 

There  was  also  entered  on  the  journal  an  explanation  of 
the  nineteenth  canon,  which  regulates  the  dress  of  candi- 
dates for  Orders,  and  other  particulars  relative  to  them. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  39 

The  explanation  goes  to  the  point,  that  such  provisions  are 
merely  a  guard  against  popular  mistakes. 

At  the  instance  of  the  clerical  members  from  the  diocese 
of  Connecticut,  who  acted  under  instructions  from  the  con- 
vention of  that  state,  the  bishops  gave  their  sense  of  some 
matters  in  the  ninth  canon,  and  in  the  fortieth.  Their 
sense,  which  was  sanctioned  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and 
Lay  Deputies,  is  as  follows: — 

The  ninth  canon  having  provided,  that  some  literary 
qualifications,  therein  specified,  may  be  dispensed  with,  in 
consideration  of  certain  other  qualifications  of  the  candidate 
for  the  ministry,  the  bishops  define  the  latter  to  be,  a  con- 
siderable extent  of  theological  learning,  a  peculiar  apti- 
tude to  teach,  and  a  large  share  of  prudence.  The  fortieth 
canon  having  referred  to  persons  who  join  a  congrega- 
tion of  this  Church  from  some  other  religious  society,  the 
bishops  rested  the  evidence  of  the  membership  of  such  a 
congregation  on  the  two  circumstances,  of  their  being  bap-$ 
tized  persons,  and  of  their  possessing  an  interest  in  its  con-] 
cerns,  by  express  or  implied  permission.  But  there  is  a 
caution  against  its  being  supposed,  that  a  more  definite 
mode  for  the  same  object  may  not  hereafter  be  profitably 
adopted. 

It  was  thought  proper,  in  this  convention,  to  issue  a  dec-/'  * 
laration,  that  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the< 
United  States,  is  the  Church  formerly  known  among  us(> 
under  the  name  of  "  the  Church  of  England  in  America."  ' 
Accordingly,  an  instrument  to  this  effect  was  drawn  up  by , 
the  bishops,  and  received  the  approbation  of  the  House  of ' 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

At  the  suggestion  of  the  bishops,  the  House  of  Clerical  ( 
and  Lay  Deputies  joined  them  in  an  instrument,  designed 
for  the  introduction  of  the  posture  of  standing  during  the  j    I 
singing  of  any  portion  of  the  psalms  or  hymns  in  metre.      / 
This  comely  practice  had  recently  been  introduced  in  some 
of  the  congregations  of  this  Church,  in  all  of  which  it  was  j )   \ 
heretofore  the  custom  to  sit  during  that  act  of  devotion. 


40  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

In  consideration  of  the  scarcity  of  the  Homilies  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  of  their  being  recognized  by  the 
Articles  of  this  Church,  although  with  due  regard  to  the 
diversity  of  local  circumstances,  the  two  houses  made  a 
provision  which  has  occasioned  an  edition  of  them  in  this 
country.  In  the  event  of  a  failure  of  this,  they  were  to  be 
provided  for  the  use  of  candidates  for  the  ministry  by  the 
bishops,  or  other  ecclesiastical  authorities  in  the  respective 
•r  states. 

tL »  On   the  journal  of  the  last  Triennial  Convention,   the 

providing  for  an  Episcopacy  in  the  western  states  was  held 
out  as  a  desirable  object.  Intermediate  circumstances  hav- 
ing prevented  the  acting  on  this  business,  it  was  again 
held  out  as  a  matter  to  be  kept  in  view. 

On   the   same  journal    there  was  recorded   a   measure, 
designed  to  obtain  from  the  Society  (in  England)  for  the 
'  Propagation  of  the  Gospel,  a  legal  title  to  lands  in  Ver- 
•  mont,  originally  appropriated  for  the  Episcopal  Church  in 
v'      those  states,  but  vested  in  that  society  in  trust.     All  pro- 
..\j      ceeding  in  this  business  was  suspended,  at  first  by  the  cir- 
cumstance that  the  necessary  documents  were  not  in  prep- 
aration; and  since,  by  the  occurrence  of  the  war. 

In  consequence  of  a  communication  to  the  bishops,  pro- 
posing to  them,  what  was  considered  as  a  profitable  im- 
provement in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  they  proposed 
to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  a  declaration, 
that  it  was  not  intended  to  bring  the  book  under  review 
during  this  convention.  And  in  consequence  of  a  commu- 
1  nication,  proposing  to  the  bishops  to  give  their  sanction  to 
a  work  on  a  subject  of  great  importance  in  religion,  they 
made  it  a  rule  of  their  house,  that  in  future,  no  application 
of  this  sort  shall  be  considered  as  regularly  before  them: 
and  they  proposed  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and*  Lay  Dep- 
uties, a  declaration  to  the  same  effect.  The  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  signified  their  concurrence  in 
the  proposals,  with  their  thanks,  for  what  they  called  "the 
judicious  course  adopted  in  reference  to  these  subjects." 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  41 

A  question  was  moved  in  each  of  the  houses,  as  to  the 
propriety  of  establishing  a  theological  school,  to  be  exclu- 
sively under  the  patronage  of  the  General  Convention. 
The  subject  was  referred  to  a  future  meeting  of  the  body; 
and,  in  the  mean  time,  measures  were  to  be  taken  to  ascer- 
tain the  general  wish  on  the  subject  in  each  of  the  states. 

A  proposal  was  also  made,  to  grant  an  exclusive  cop; 
right  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  for  a  valuable  con- 
sideration.    This  also  was  delayed,  under  the  same  pro- 
vision,   for  the  ascertaining   of  the  general   sense   of  the 
Church;  and,  with  it,  advice  in  law. 

As  at  each  of  the  last  two  conventions,  a  pastoral  letter 
was  drawn  up  by  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  read  in  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

The  convention  appointed  their  next  triennial  meeting 
to  be  in  the  City  of  New  York.  r. 

Agreeably  to  appointment  at  the  last  General  Conven-^ 
tion,  there  assembled  another  in  the  City  of  New  York,  on 
the  2Oth  of  May,  1817.     There  were  present  all  the  bishops:  /  ^ 
the  house  then  consisting  of  Bishops  White,  Hobart,  Gris- 
•\-wold,    Dehon,    Moore,    Kemp,    and   Croes.     The   occasion 
I   was  opened  by  a  discourse  from  Bishop  Griswold.  * 

In  consequence  of  an  application  from  the  Church  in    , 
North  Carolina,  in  which  a  convention  had  been  held,  the  ' 
said  Church  was  considered  as  having  acceded  to  the  ec- 
clesiastical   constitution.     From   the   time   of  the    revolu- 
tionary war,  there  had  been  but  temporary  supplies  of  the 
ministry  in  a  few  places;  but  some   clergymen,    recently 
settled  in  the  state,  in  connection  with  some  influential  lay 
gentlemen,  had  taken  active  measures  for  the  revival  of  our 
communion. 


*  During  the  recess  of  the  convention,  Dr.  Kemp  had  been  consecrated  on  the 
first  day  of  September,  1814,  in  Christ  Church,  in  the  City  of  Brunswick,  New  / 
Jersey,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  assisted  by  Bishops  Hobart  and  Moore.  And 
Dr.  Croes  had  been  consecrated  on  the  igth  day  of  November,  1815,  in  St.' 
Peter's  Church,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  assisted  by 
Bishops  Hobart  and  Kemp. 


42  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

The  presiding  bishop  made  report  of  sundry  matters 
committed  to  him  by  the  last  convention.  They  were  the 
certifying  to  the  venerable  Society  (in  England)  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel,  of  certain  facts  in  favor  of  the 
Church  in  Vermont,  relatively  to  lands  of  which  the  titles 
were  vested  in  the  society — the  taking  of  measures  rela- 
tively to  the  organizing  of  the  Church  beyond  the  Alleghany 
i  Mountains,  and  the  republishing  of  the  journals  of  this 
Church  from  the  beginning.  The  first  and  the  last  had 
been  carried  into  effect,  and  the  other  had  been  attended 
to,  as  far  as  circumstances  would  permit.  The  thanks  of 
the  house  were  voted  to  the  presiding  bishop. 

Relatively  to  the  last  mentioned  subjects,  the  House  of 
Bishops  saw  cause  to  record  their  opinion  as  follows: — 

"  Resolved,  That  it  be  recommended  to  the  Episcopal 
congregations  in  the  states  referred  to  in  the  above  com- 
munications, where  conventions  are  not  already  organized, 
to  organize  conventions,  which  may  be  received  into  union 
with  this  convention,  and,  when  expedient,  may  unite, 
according  to  the  canons,  in  the  choice  of  a  bishop,  having 
jurisdiction  over  those  states;  and  that  this  convention 
have  received,  with  much  satisfaction,  information  of  the 
measures  which  have  been  already  adopted  in  the  State  of 
Ohio,  for  the  organization  of  the  Church  in  that  state. 

"Resolved,  That  though  the  measure  of  a  convention 
comprising  sundry  states  in  the  western  country,  may  be  a 
I  measure  of  temporary  expediency,  it  can  not  be  authorized 
by  this  convention  consistently  with  the  general  constitu- 
tion of  the  Church,  wHich  recognizes  only  a  convention  of 
the  Church  in  each  state. 

"  Resolved,  That  it  be  earnestly  recommended  to  the  au- 
thorities of  this  Church,  in  each  state  respectively,  to  adopt 
measures  for  sending  missionaries  to  our  destitute  brethren 
in  the  western  states:  such  missionaries  to  be  subjected  to 
the  direction  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  state  or 
states  in  which  they  may  officiate. 

"Resolved,  That  the  presiding^  bishop  be  requested  to 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  43 

transmit  the  foregoing  resolutions  to  such  person  or  persons 
as  he  may  judge  proper." 

This  resolve  was  carried  into  effect,  partly  by  a  canon 
made  during  the  session,  and  partly  by  a  forwarding  of  the 
contemplated  communications. 

The  several  bishops  made  reports  on  the  sense  of  the 
Church  in  their  respective  dioceses,  on  the  subject  of  a  theo- 
logical school.     There  was  diversity  of  opinion,  but  the  gen- 
eral sense,  in  both  houses,  was  in  favor  of  a  general  school;  , 
which,  on  the  proposal  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  with  1 
the  consent  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  was  ( 
determined  to  be  instituted  in  New  York.    For  the  carrying  J 
of  the  design  into  effect,  there  was  chosen  a  committee,  con- 
sisting of  members  of  both  houses.    On  the  part  of  the  House 
of  Bishops,  there  were  chosen  Bishops  White,  Hobart  and 
Croes;  and  on  the  part  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  Drs.  Wharton,  Harris,  and  How,  Hon.  Rufus  King, 
Charles  Fenton  Mercer,  Esq.,  and  William  Meredith,  Esq. 

The  House  of  Bishops  thought  it  expedient  to  make  a 
solemn  call  on  the  attention  of  the  clergy  in  relation  to  the 
twenty-second  canon,  which  enjoins  on  them  diligence  in  | 
catechetical  instruction  and  lectures.  The  bishops  con- 
sider these  as  among  the  most  important  duties  of  clergy- 
men, and  among  the  most  effectual  means  of  promoting 
religious  knowledge  and  practical  piety. 

It  being  represented  to  the  House  of  Bishops  by  Bishop 
Hobart,  that  the  congregation  du  St.  Esprit,  in  the  City 
of  New  York,  having  joined  the  communion  of  the  Episco- 
pal Church,  with  their  minister,  who  had  lately  received 
Episcopal  ordination,  which  congregation  consisted  origi- 
nally of  Protestant  emigrants  from  France;  and  there  being 
many  to  whom  the  French  language  is  still  more  familiar 
than  the  English,  it  is  expedient  that  they  be  furnished 
with  the  liturgy  in  the  former  language;  and  that  there  is 
such  a  liturgy,  not  sanctioned  by  this  convention,  it  was 
recommended  to  the  said  bishop  to  cause  the  said  French 
liturgy  to  be  examined,  in.  order  to  ascertain  how  far  the 


44  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

translation  is  correct,  and  to  confirm  the  use  theieof,  with 
such  amendments  and  improvements  as  the  case  may  call 
for;  and  to  declare  it  to  be  the  liturgy  which  may  be  used 
by  any  minister  of  this  Church  who  may  officiate  in  a  con- 
gregation to  whom  the  French  language  is  familiar. 

The  bishops  issued  the  following  call  on  the  members  of 
this  Church,  and  sent  it  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  to  be  there  read:  which  was  accordingly  done. 

"The  House  of  Bishops,  solicitous  for  the  preservation 
of  the  purity  of  the  Church,  and  the  piety  of  its  members, 
are  induced  to  impress  upon  the  clergy  the  important  duty, 
with  a  discreet  but  earnest  zeal,  of  warning  the  people  of 
their  respective  cures,  of  the  danger  of  an  indulgence  in 
those  worldly  pleasures  which  may  tend  to  withdraw  the 
affections  from  spiritual  things.  And  especially  on  the 
subject  of  gaming,  of  amusements  involving  cruelty  to  the 
brute  creation,  and  of  theatrical  representations,  to  which 
some  peculiar  circumstances  have  called  their  attention, — 
they  do  not  hesitate  to  express  their  unanimous  opinion, 
that  these  amusements,  as  well  from  their  licentious  ten- 
dency, as  from  the  strong  temptations  to  vice  which  they 
afford,  ought  not  to  be  frequented.  And  the  bishops  can 
not  refrain  from  expressing  their  deep  regret  at  the  infor- 
mation, that  in  some  of  our  large  cities,  so  little  respect  is 
paid  to  the  feelings  of  the  members  of  the  Church,  that 
theatrical  representations  are  fixed  for  the  evenings  of  her 
most  solemn  festivals."* 

On  the  question  referred  by  the  last  convention,  to  be 
reported  on  in  this,  relatively  to  the  copyright  of  the  Book 
;  of  Common  Prayer,  the  measure  was  considered  as  disap- 
\  proved  of,  so  far  as  opinion  could  be  ascertained. 

A  proposed  change  in  the  ecclesiastical  constitution  was 
referred  to  the  several  state  conventions.  It  was  to  change 
the  time  of  the  triennial  meeting  to  the  first  Tuesday  in 
October. 

•  See  on  this  subject  these  Memoirs,  page  177.     Ed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  45 

The  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  proposed  to 
the  House  of  Bishops,  the  designating  of  a  standard  copy 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  It  was  too  late  to  enter 
on  the  business,  and  "the  House  of  Bishops  deeming  the 
fulfilment  of  the  request  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  on  the  subject  of  an  authentic  edition  of  the  Holy 
Bible, e  matter  requiring  very  serious  attention  and  deliber- 
ation, resolve,  that  its  members  will  give  such  attention  and 
deliberation  to  the  subject,  previously  to  the  next  meeting 
of  the  General  Convention,  and  report  at  the  said  meeting."  ,/  .  I 

The  table  of  degrees  of  consanguinity  and  affinity,  pro-^^/M 
hibitory  of  marriage,  was  again  referred,  and  a  committee     A 
was  appointed  on  the  subject,  consisting  of  Bishops  White,  ^ 
Kemp,  and  Croes. 

There  passed  three  canons.  The  first  was  the  limiting 
of  the  operation  of  the  second  and  thirty-seventh  canons, 
s(3  far  as  regarded  the  states  westward  of  the  mountains. 
The  professed  reason  was,  the  providing  of  that  country 
with  a  bishop,  if  a  suitable  person  should  be  presented, 
whatever  might  be  the  number  of  resident  presbyters,  and 
even  if  there  be  none.  There  was  the  further  reason,  that 
if  it  should  be  thought-convenient  to  unite  with  a  western 
diocese  the  western  counties  of  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia, 
and  if  there  should  be  the  consent  of  the  Church  in  each  of 
the  said  states,  there  might  be  a  temporary  provision  for 
the  purpose,  consistent  with  the  integrity  of  the  Church  in  f 
each  state. 

(~~The  second  canon  makes  a  clergyman's  renunciation  of 
the  ministry  a  cause  of  admonition,  or  of  suspension,  or  of 
degradation. 
The  third  canon  provided,  that  in  the  case  of  expulsion 
from  the  communion,  and  information  given  to  the  bishop 
as  required  by  the  second  rubric  before  the  communion  ser-    * 
vice;  if  the  expelled  party  make  no  complaint,  there  shall 
be  no  inquiry  instituted.     The  bishop,  on  receiving  com- 
plaint, is  to  institute  an  inquiry,  and  the  notice  given  by 
the  minister  is  a  sufficient  presentation. 


46 


HfEAfOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 


-    ) 

t 
\jl^ 


^ 


/  b     ' 


A  pastoral  letter  was  again  drawn  up  by  the  House 
of  Bishops,  and  read  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies. 

When  the  convention  adjourned,  Philadelphia  was  ap- 
pointed to  be  the  place  of  the  next  meeting,  s. 

\The  narrative  of  the  first  edition  here  concluded] 

Agreeably  to  appointment,  the  General  Convention  as-^ 
sembled  in  St.  James'  Church,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  l 
on  Tuesday,  the  i6th  of  May,  1820,  and  continued  in  ses-  J 
sion  until  Wednesday,  the  24th  of  the  same  month.     The 
bishops  present,  were   Bishops  White,   Hobart,   Griswold, 
Moore,    Kemp,    Croes,    Bowen,    and    Brownell;    being   the    :  < 
whole  of  the  Episcopal  body,  with  the  exception  of  Bishop    , 
Chase.     Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,    j  • 
and  Dr.  William  Wilmer  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies!     The  Rev.  William  Augustus  Muhlenberg  was 
secretary  of  the  former  house,  and  the  Rev.  Ashbel  Bald- 
win, with  the  Rev.  John  C.  Rudd,  were  secretary  and  as- 
sistant secretary  of  the  latter.     On  Wednesday,  the  25th, 
the  houses  having  been  organized  on  the  preceding  day,  the 
convention  was  opened  with  a  sermon  from  Bishop  Moore. 

The  territory  formerly  known  by  the  name  of  the  Dis- 
trict of  Maine,  having  been  received  by  Congress  as  an 
independent  state,  and  the  Church  therein  having  become 
organized,  it  was  admitted  as  a  member  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical union. 

That  part  of  the  forty-fifth  canon  which  requires  the 
reading  of  episcopal  addresses  from  the  journal  of  the 
state  conventions,  being  thought  to  occasion  an  unnec- 
essary spending  of  time,  was  repealed  by  the  first  canon 
of  this  convention. 

The  first  canon  of  1816  having  been  accommodated  to 
the  existing  circumstances  of  the  Church  in  the  State  of 
Ohio,  and  the  object  of  it  having  been  accomplished,  it  was 
repealed  by  the  second  canon  of  those  now  passed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  47 

By  the  third,  the  pastoral  letters,  to  be  issued  hereafter 
at  the  times  of  the  Triennial  Conventions,  are  required  to 
be  read  by  the  clergy  in  their  respective  congregations. 

By  the  fourth,  an  improvement  was  made  in  the  seven- 
teenth canon  of  1808,  in  reference  to  testimonials  to  be 
accommodated  to  the  respective  cases. 

By  the  fifth,  the  same  canon  of  1808  was  so  far  altered, 
as  to  require  from  a  candidate  for  the  ministry,  not  a  citi- 
zen of  the  United  States,  and  having  officiated  as  a  minis- 
ter of  another  denomination,  that  he  produce  evidence  of 
his  residence  for  one  year. 

The  sixth  concerned  the  consecration  of  bishops.     The 
testimonials  of  the  bishop-elect,  instead  of  being  presented 
to  any  three  bishops,  are  to  be  presented  to  the  presiding  ( 
blsHop^  who  is  to  communicate  them  to  the  other  bishops.  /  »> 
In  the  event  of  the  consent  of  the  major  number  of  them,  ' 
the  presiding  bishop,  or  any  three  to  whom  he  may  com- 
municate the  testimonials  and  the  consent  of  the  major  /  'tfr «- 
number,  may  proceed  to  the  consecration.     But  if  a  bishop  , 
have  been  elected  within  one  year  of  a  General  Conven-  (&\  nt  0*Q 
tion,  his  consecration  is  to  be  deferred  to  the  time  of  their  -7      /,    ^* 
assembling. 

It  was  thought  conducive  to  the  exercise  of  discipline, 
to  moderate  the  publicity  of  ecclesiastical  censures  on  any 
offending  minister,  in  the  event  of  his  voluntary  renunci- 
ation of  the  ministry:  which  is  the  purport  of  the  seventh 
canon. 

The  eighth  provides,  that  in  the  case  of  a  candidate  for 
Orders,  his  sufficiency  in  the  acquirements  exacted  for  the 
first  examination,  prescribed  by  the  tenth  canon  of  1808, 
shall  be  ascertained  before  his  admission  as  a  candidate; 
and  further,  that  the  said  acquirements  shall  not  be  dis- 
pensed with,  unless  there  be  a  testimonial  from  at  least  two 
presbyters,  "stating,  that,  in  their  opinion,  he  possesses 
extraordinary  strength  of  natural  understanding,  a  peculiar 
aptitude  to  teach,  and  a  large  share  of  prudence." 

On  an  application  for  the  sanctioning  of  a  selection  of 


48  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Psalms  and  Hymns,  made  from  the  authorized  Book  of 
Psalms  and  Hymns  in  metre,  there  was  a  refusal,  on  the 
ground  of  the  resolution  of  the  two  houses  in  the  conven- 
tion of  1814,  against  the  giving  of  a  conventional  sanction 
to  any  publication  not  issued  as  of  authority  in  this  Church. 

The  convention  thought  it  a  matter  of  sufficient  impor- 
tance, to  give  instruction  concerning  the  title  page  of  future 
editions  of  the  Book  of  Common  PrayerTTor  th^Tecuring  of, 
accuracy;  and  further,  for  the  observing  of  the  due  distinc-' 
tion  between  the  said  book,  and  other  books  and  documents, 
not  the  same,  although  of  equal  authority  in  this  Church. 

The  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  requested  the 
House  of  Bishops,  who  referred  it  to  the  presiding  bishop, 
with  such  aid  as  he  may  think  proper  to  employ,  to  take 
measures  for  making  known  any  errors  or  omissions  in 
the  edition  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  printed  in  New 
York,  by  Hugh  Gaine,  in  the  year  1793,  and  established 
by  the  forty-third  canon  of  1808,  as  the  standard  book,  so 
that  they  may  be  avoided  or  supplied  in  future  editions. 

There  was  a  similar  request  and  a  similar  reference  to 
the  presiding  bishop,  to  correct  or  supply  any  errors  or 
omissions  in  the  calendar  and  tables  prefixed  to  the  said 
book,  and  to  extend  the  table  of  the  days  on  which  Easter 
will  fall  for  two  cycles  of  the  moon,  from  the  year  1823. 
[By  an  evident  typographical  error,  it  is  1813  on  the 
Journal.] 

The  two  houses  appointed  a  joint  committee,  to  make  a 
collection  of  the  journals  of  the  General  Conventions,  and 
of  the  several  Diocesan  Conventions,  and  of  other  impor- 
tant documents,  connected  with  the  history  of  the  Church 
in  the  United  States,  and  to  deposit  the  same,  subject  to 
the  disposal  of  the  General  Convention,  in  such  hands  as 
may  be  deemed  proper  for  the  present,  and  until  a  further 
'  order  of  the  convention.     The  difficulty  of  procuring  sets 
1  of  the  journals  of  the  preceding  years  was  strong  proof  of 
there  being  a  use  in  the  present  measure. 

There   was   also   a   committee    appointed   by   the    two 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  49 

houses,  to  take  such  measures  in  the  recess  of  the  conven- 
tion, as  they  might  find  suitable  "for  the  establishment  of 
a  standard,  according  to  which  all  copies  of  the  Scriptures, 
to  be  recommended  to   the  use   of  the  members  of  this 
Church,  shall  be  printed."     This  matter,  at  the  rising  of 
the  General  Convention  of  1817,  had  been  submitted  by  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  to  the  consideration 
of  the  bishops  during  the  recess.     The  bishops,  in  the  con- 
vention of  1820,  noticing  the  cause  of  the  reference  in  a 
corruption  of  a  particular  text  in  a  late  edition,  tending  to  * 
sustain  a  species  of  ordination  unknown  in  Scripture,  had 
reported  to  the  following  effect.     They  were  of  opinion, 
that  in  consequence  of  the  exclusive  privilege  enjoyed  in 
England  for  the  printing  of  the  Bible,  and  the  heavy  fines 
which  may  be  inflicted  on  the  patentees  for  a  falsifying  of 
the  text,  the  English  editions  may  in  general  be  depended  ? 
on;  there  having  been  noticed  but  few  inaccuracies  in  any 
of  them,   and   those   being   unimportant.     An   edition   by 
Eyre  and  Strahan,  in  1806,  and  another  by  them  in  1^12, 
had  been   spoken  of  as  the  most  perfect  extant,  but  the 
bishops  had  not  been  able  to  procure  a  copy.     They  gave  ^ 
a  caution  against  certain  fraudulent  copies  of  the  Bible  • 
imported  from  England,  printed  by  unauthorized  individ-  ' 
uals,  who  avoided  the  law  by  a  few  notes  in   the  lower 
margin,  which  may  be  cut  from  the  text,  but  favor^the  { 
pretence  of  the  editing  of  a  commentary.     Such  copies  had  '• 
been  found  exceedingly  corrupt. 

In  regard  to  editions  issued  in  the  United  States,  the 
bishops  had  found  them  generally  as  correct  as  could 
have  been  reasonably  expected,  considering  the  difficulty 
of  avoiding  typographical  errors. 

Further,  they  were  aware,  that  their  report  did  not  go 
to  the  desirable  extent;  and  it  was  this  consideration  which 
led  to  the  appointment  of  the  joint  committee. 

There  came  before  the  two  houses,  the  proposal  of  the 
last  General  Convention  for  the  changing  of  the  time  of  the 
meeting  from  May  to  October.  The  House  of  Bishops 


50  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

proposed  the  ratifying  of  it,  but  the  House  of  Clerical  and 
Lay  Deputies  now  convened,  signified  their  non-concur- 
rence. Then  there  came  from  the  latter  house  such  an 
alteration  of  the  first  article  of  the  constitution,  as  subjects 
|  to  the  discretion  of  every  Triennial  Convention,  the  ,time 
J  as^well  as  the  place  of  the  assembling  of  the  next,  with 
authority  in  the  presiding  bishop,  in  the  case  of  the  occur- 
rence of  epidemical  disease,  to  make  a  change  of  place.  In 
thjs  the  House  of  Bishops  concurred,  and  it  will  rest  with 
the  next  convention  to  decide. 

The  principal  subject  of  discussion  related  to  the  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  the  location  of  which  became  transferred 
by  this  convention  from  New  York  to  New  Haven,  in  Con- 
necticut, adopting  sundry  measures  for  the  furtherance  of 
the  design.  When  the  bishops  concurred  in  the  proposal, 
they  unanimously  declared,  that  they  did  not  "mean  by 
this  concurrence  to  interfere  with  any  plan  now  contem- 
plated, or  that  may  hereafter  be  contemplated,  in  any  dio- 
cese or  dioceses,  for  the  establishment  of  theological  insti- 
tutions or  professorships;  and  further,  they  esteem  it  their 
duty  to  express  the  opinion,  that  the  various  sums  sub- 
scribed, having  been  thus  subscribed  under  an  act  of  the 
convention  establishing  the  seminary  in  New  York,  the 
subscribers  who  have  not  paid  are  not  now  bound,  except 
they  think  proper,  to  pay  their  subscriptions;  the  institu- 
tion being  removed  to  a  different  city."  This  declaration 
was  received,  and  read,  and  not  objected  to,  in  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

There  was  proposed  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  and  concurred  in  by  the  bishops,  a  constitution 
•  of  a  missionary  society,  for  foreign  and  domestic  missions, 
which  became  inefficient  from  an  irregularity  in  the  choice 
of  the  trustees.  The  society  was  located  in  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  and  the  members  there  resident,  after  fre- 
quent consultations,  did  not  think  themselves  authorized 
to  proceed.  The  error  resulted  from  the  press  of  business 
•  on  the  last  day  of  the  session. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  51 

When  the  convention  adjourned,  it  was  with  the  deter- 
mination that  the  next  General  Convention  should  meet  in 
Philadelphia. 

The  whole  was  concluded  with  prayer  by  the  presiding 
bishop,  t. 

The  next  General  Convention  being  ^pedal,  was  held  in 
1821,  in  St.  Peter's  Church,  in  the  City  ofrmtadelphia,  from 
October  3<Dth  to  November  the  3d,  inclusive.  The  bishops 
present,  were  Bishop  White,  of  Pennsylvania,  presiding 
bishop;  Bishop  Hobart,  of  New  York;  Bishop  Griswold,  of 
'  the  Eastern  Diocese;  Bishop  Kemp,  of  Maryland;  Bishop 
Croes,  of  New  Jersey;  and  Bishop  Brownell,  of  Connecti- 
cut. In  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  the  Rev. 
Dr.  William  Wilmer  presided,  the  Rev.  Ashbel  Baldwin 
was  secretary,  and  the  Rev.  John  C.  Rudd  was  assistant 
secretary.  The  Rev.  William  Augustus  Muhlenberg  was 
secretary  of  the  House  of  Bishops. 

This  convention  assembled  on  the  call  of  the  presiding 
bishop,  induced  by  the  desire  of  the  major  number  .of  the 
bishops;  it  being  induced  by  the  desire  of  the  trustees  of 
the  Theological  Seminary,  to  consider  whether  any  or 
what  measures  should  be  adopted,  for  the  obtaining  of  a 
legacy  of  about  sixty  thousand  dollars,  bequeathed  by  Ja- 
cob Sherred,  of  the  City  of  New  York,  to  a  seminary  which 
should  be  instituted  within  the  state,  either  by  the  General 
Convention  or  by  that  of  the  diocese  in  which  the  testator 
lived  and  died.  It  became  a  question,  which  of  two  semi- 
naries was  entitled  to  the  legacy.  On  the  one  hand,  the 
general  seminary  being  the  first  named,  was  thought  enti- 
tled to  it,  on  the  condition  of  removal  to  New  York:  and 
several  eminent  gentlemen  of  the  law  had  given  their  opin- 
ions in  the  affirmative.  On  the  other  hand,  legal  gentle- 
men of  equal  eminence  were  of  opinion,  that  as  the  dioce- 
san seminary  was  in  a  capacity  to  go  into  immediate 
operation,  it  had  the  preferable  claim. 

The  convention  was  opened  by  a  sermon  from  Bishop 
Kemp.  u. 


52  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

The  two  houses  became  immediately  occupied  by  the 
business  for  which  they  had  been  called  together.  There 
was  appointed  a  joint  committee,  who,  after  contemplating 
the  subject  in  its  various  points  of  view,  and  after  discuss- 
ing various  projects  for  the  combining  of  the  'seminaries 
now  existing  in  New  Haven  and  New  York,  all,  in  the 
spirit  of  conciliation  and  mutual  concession,  arrived  at  the 
result,  which  appears  in  the  organization  as  it  now  stands. 
All  the  members  of  the  committee  concurred  in  giving 
praise  to  Judge  Cameron,  of  North  Carolina,  for  the  ability 
and  good  temper  manifested  by  him  in  the  progress  of  the 
business :  and  the  same  were  again  displayed  by  him,  when 
it  came  before  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

However,  it  did  not  pass  in  the  house  without  opposi- 
,'  tion;  which  was  almost  confined  to  the  clerical  and  lay  gen- 
tlemen from  Virginia;  with  whom  it  is  a  favorite  idea,  to 
establish  a  theological  professorship  in  the  college  of  Wil- 
liam and  Mary,  in  Williamsburg. 

The  outlines  of  the  newly  organized  institution  are  as 
follow.  The  school  of  New  Haven,  and  that  of  New  York, 
are  to  be  combined,  and  to  be  seated  in  the  latter  state. 
All  the  bishops  are  to  be  trustees  officially.  The  other 
trustees  are  to  be  chosen  in  the  several  states,  and  to  be 
residents  in  them  respectively.  In  each  state  there  is  to  be 
a  trustee  chosen  for  every  eight  of  its  clergy,  and  for  every 
two  thousand  dollars  contributed;  except,  that  when  ten 
thousand  dollars  shall  have  been  contributed  in  any  state,  ten 
thousand  dollars  shall  be  required  for  every  additional  trus- 
teeship. The  seminary  is  empowered  to  establish  branches; 
and  it  is  understood,  that  a  branch  school  is  to  be  forthwith 
^established  at  Geneva,  in  New  York.  w. 

Another  business  of  similar  importance  was  brought 
before  the  two  houses — that  of  a  missionary  society,  de- 
signed by  the  last  convention,  but  so  strangely  instituted, 
that  the  gentlemen  named  as  managers  found  themselves 
incompetent  to  the  purpose  of  the  appointment.  There 
was  now  a  new  scheme  proposed  by  the  bishops,  more  com- 


NARRATIVE    OP    EVENTS.  53 

plete,  and  in  every  respect  more  reasonable  than  the  for- 
mer. The  scheme  had  the  concurrence  of  the  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  x. 

The  House  of  Bishops,  sent  to  the  other  house,  an  opin- 
ion explanatory  of  the  last  rubric  in  the  communion  ser- 
vice, which  had  been  interpreted  by  some  as  dispensing 
with  the  reading  of  the  ante-communion  service,  if  a  ser- 
mon were  to  follow.  This  was  not  to  be  acted  onby  the 
house  to  which  it  was  sent,  and  accordingly  they  only 
noticed  the  communication,  y. 

The  presiding  bishop  laid  before  the  House  of  Bishops  a 
report  on  certain  subjects  committed  to  him  by  the  last 
convention.  They  were,  the  calculating  of  a  table  of  the 
days  on  which  Easter  will  fall  for  two  cycles  of  the  moon, 
the  making  of  necessary  alterations  in  the  calendar,  and 
the  ascertaining  of  errors  in  the  book  published  by  Hugh 
Gaine,  in  1793,  and  made  the  standard  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  It  was  proposed  in  the  report  to  appoint  a  joint  ^ 
committee  to  establish  another  standard  book  in  the  recess.  / 
The  report  was  sent  the  other  house,  and  required  nothing 
on  their  part,  except  concurrence  in  appointing  a  joint  com- 
mittee, which  took  place,  z. 

When  the  convention  adjourned,  it  was  after  prayers  by 
the  presiding  bishop,  and  a  short  address  by  him,  expres- 
sive of  the  feeling  which  possessed  him  at  so  happy  a  con- 
clusion, and  so  different  from  what  had  been  apprehended. 
Then  followed  the  singing  of  the  I33d  Psalm,  and  the 
Benediction. 

The  next  General  Convention  was  held  in  Philadelphia,    .    ^ 
from  the  23d  to  the  26th  day  of  May,   1823.     The  bishops  /^ 
present,  were  Bishop  White,  of  Pennsylvania;  Bishop  Gris- 
wold,  of  the  Eastern  Diocese;  Bishop  Moore,  of  Virginia;     fl 
Bishop  Kemp,   of  Maryland ;    Bishop  Croes,   of  New  Jer- 
sey;  Bishop  Bowen,  of  South  Carolina;  Bishop  Chase,  of/V,, 
Ohio;  Bishop  Brownell,  of  Connecticut;  and  (after  his  con- 
secration) Bishop  Ravenscroft,  of  North  Carolina.     Of  the 
two  absent,  Bishop  Hobart  was  detained  by  sickness. 


54  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  William  Wilmer,  of  Virginia,  was  chosen 
president  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.  The 
Rev.  Ashbel  Baldwin  was  chosen  their  secretary,*  and  the 
Rev.  John  C.  Rudd,  their  assistant  secretary.  The  Rev. 
William  H.  De  Lancey  was  chosen  secretary  of  the  House 
of  Bishops. 

The  Church  of  Georgia  was  received  into  the  union. 

The  Rev.  John  S.  Ravenscroft,  elected  bishop  of  the 
Church  in  North  Carolina,  being  duly  recommended  to  the 
bishops  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  was 
consecrated  in  St.  Paul's  Church,  and  took  his  seat  in  the 
House  of  Bishops.  Sundry  communications  from  Bishop 
Chase,  of  Ohio,  were  received  through  the  presiding  bishop, 
by  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  it  was  referred  to  the  presid- 
ing bishop  to  answer  them.  aa. 

At  the  convention  of  1820,  a  committee  had  been  ap- 
pointed, consisting  of  the  presiding  bishop,  the  Rev.  George 
Boyd,  and  the  Rev.  Jackson  Kemper,  to  make  a  collection 
of  journals  and  other  documents,  connected  with  the  history 
of  the  American  Church.  They  made  a  report,  which  was 
accepted,  bb. 

A  canon  was  passed,  regulating  the  admission  of  candi- 
dates for  holy  Orders,  and  repealing  the  first  paragraph  of 
the  seventh  canon  of  1808.  cc. 

Another  canon  was  passed,  prescribing  the  mode  of  pub- 
lishing authorized  editions  of  the  standard  Bible  of  this 
Church.  The  two  houses  concurred  in  approbation  of  a 
report  made  on  the  subject  of  the  Theological  Seminary. 

On  the  subject  of  the  Psalms  and  Hymns,  a  joint  com- 
mittee was  appointed,  consisting  of  the  presiding  bishop, 
Bishop  Hobart,  and  Bishop  Croes,  the  Rev.  William  Meade, 
the  Rev.  Samuel  F.  Jarvis,  D.D.,  the  Rev.  William  A.  MuKl- 
enberg,  the  Rev.  Jackson  Kemper,  the  Rev.  Samuel  Tur- 
ner, D.D.,  the  Rev.  Richard  S.  Mason,  the  Hon.  Kensey 
Johns,  the  Hon.  Robert  H.  Goldsborough,  John  Read,  Esq., 

•  He  at  once  resigned  the  office.    Ed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  55 

Edward  J.  Stiles,  Esq.,  Teji£h_Tilghman,  Esq.,  Francis  S. 
Key,  Esq.,  and  Peter  Kean,  Esq. 

A  report  was  made  by  a  committee  appointed  at  the 
last  General  Convention,  on  the  subject  of  a  standard  edi- 
tion of  the  Holy  Bible.  The  report  was  accepted;  and 
a  mode  was  appointed  of  publishing  authorized  editions. 
The  approved  edition  was  by  Eyre  and  Strahan  (London) 
in  1806  and  1812. 

A  report  was  made  of  the  proceedings  of  the  executive 
committee  of  the  Missionary  Society.  During  the  session, 
there  was  a  meeting  held  of  the  society  in  St.  Paul's  Church. 
The  report  of  the  executive  committee  was  approved  of 
by  both  houses,  and  the  printing  of  it  was  ordered,  dd. 

A  message  was  sent  to  the  House  of  Bishops,  concern- 
ing the  American  Colonization  Society.  The  bishops,  con- 
sidering it  rather  of  a  political  than  of  a  religious  nature, 
declined  the  proposal  of  sending  a  delegate  to  an  intended 
meeting  of  that  body,  but  expressed  approbation  of  their 
object.  The  resolve  of  the  bishops  was  sent  to  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  and  was  there  read  and  re- 
turned. Nothing  further  was  done  in  the  business,  ce. 

A  joint  committee  was  appointed  to  report  on  the  cir- 
cumstances of  different  colleges  in  the  United  States,  in 
reference  to  religious  instruction  given  in  them  respect- 
ively, and  on  the  practicability  of  establishing  a  seminary 
or  seminaries  for  the  education  of  youth,  under  the  influ- 
ence and  authority  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church. 
The  committee  were  the  presiding  bishop,  Bishops  Bowen 
and  Brownell,  Rev.  Dr.  Wharton,  Rev.  Mr.  Baldwin,  Rev. 
Mr.  Hooper,  Mr.  Kean,  and  Mr.  Wilkins.  ff. 

The  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  drew  up  a  re- 
port on  the  state  of  the  Church  in  the  several  dioceses, 
and  sent  it  to  the  House  of  Bishops.  That  house  returned 
it  with  their  triennial  pastoral  letter,  which  was  read. 

There  was  a  nomination  of  trustees  of  the  General  The- 
ological Seminary,  and  a  recommendation  of  further  efforts 
for  the  increase  of  its  funds. 


56  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH, 

During  the  session,  a  sermon  was  preached  before  the 
body  by  the  presiding  bishop,  in  St.  Peter's  Church,  and  a 
collection  was  made  for  the  Domestic  and  Foreign  Mis- 
sionary Society. 

A  plan  was  adopted  for  the  defraying  of  the  expenses 
of  every  General  Convention. 

The  next  meeting  was  appointed  to  be  in  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  on  the  first  Tuesday  in  November,  1826. 

As  usual,  the  session  was  concluded  with  devotional 
exercises  by  the  presiding  bishop. 

The  next  General  Convention  was  held  in  St.  Peter's 
Church,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  from  the  /th  to  the 
1 5th  of  November,  in  the  year  1826.  All  the  bishops  were 
present,  except  Bishop  Moore,  of  Virginia;  who,  previously 
to  the  occasion,  with  the  intention  of  attendance,  had  pro- 
ceeded from  that  state  to  Hartford,  in  Connecticut;  in 
which  town  he  continued  during  the  session,  under  the 
visitation  of  a  very  dangerous  disease. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Wilmer,  of  Virginia,  was  chosen  president 
of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  and  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Benjamin  T.  Onderdonk,  of  New  York,  was  chosen 
secretary;  .who,  with  permission  of  the  house,  appointed 
the  Rev,._GeorgeJWeller,  of  Pennsylvania,  assistant  secre- 
tary. The  Rev.  William  H.  De  Lancey,  of  the  latter  state, 
was  chosen  secretary  of  the  House  of  Bishops. 

The  convention  was  opened  by  divine  service,  by  a  ser- 
mon from  Bishop  Bowen,  of  South  Carolina,  and  by  the 
administration  of  the  holy  communion. 

There  was  submitted  to  the  two  houses  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  Church  in  the  State  of  Mississippi;  which,  being 
considered  constitutional,  the  said  Church  was  admitted 
into  union,  and  a  clerical  deputy  from  it  took  his  seat  in 
the  convention. 

The  most  interesting  business  brought  before  the  body, 
was  that  presented  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  bishops, 
to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  for  the  short  en  - 
ing  of  the  service  in  sundry  particulars.  This  immediately 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  57 

produced  ji_great  excitemeat  in  the  minds  of  many  of  the 
members,  both  clerical  and  layj  and  it  was  especially  a 
matter  ofjsurprise,  that  the  proposal  should  come  from  the 
bishops,  who  had  been  thought  by  many  too  strict,  and  by 
none  too  lax  in  the  requisition  of  conformity  to  the  entire 
service,  gg. 

It  would  not  appear  from  the  journal,  but  is  a  fact  which 

ought  to  be  recorded  in  this  place,  that  the  proposal  for 

abbreviation,  as  at  first  sent  by  the  bishops,  contained  the 

,  limiting  of  the  use  of  the  litany  to  seasons  and  days  espe- 

•  ciaTly  appointed  for  humiliation.     This  occasioned  so  great 

a  sensation  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  that 

the  bishops  tacitly  withdrew  their  communication,  and  then 

presented  it  in  the  form  in  which  it  now  appears  on  the 

journal,     hh. 

So  far  as  regards  the  morning  and  the  evening  services, 
the  proposed  abbreviations  were  a  permission  to  exercise 
discretion  as  to  the  number  of  psalms,  and  to  the  portions 
of  lessons;  provided,  in  regard  to  each  lesson,  there  be  at 
least  fifteen  verses.  License  was  also  given,  in  reference 
to  the  calendar,  that  in  churches  in  which  there  is  the 
observance  of  what  are  called  the  prayer  days,  the  minister 
may  make  his  choice  of  a  chapter  intervening  between  one 
such  day  and  another.  The  notoriety  that  the  calendar 
was  constructed  with  a  view  to  a  daily  morning  and  even- 
ing service,  is  proof,  that  where  this  does  not  obtain,  but 
there  is  service  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  it  is  condu- 
cive to  edification  to  admit  the  proposed  latitude,  it. 

Besides,   the   alterations   in    the   morning   and   evening     /C^  / 
services,  there  were  proposed  two  in  the  Office  for  Confir- 
mation— both  of  them  permissive.     The  first  was  a  prefaceX" 
confessed  by  all  to  be  more  suited  to  present  times  than  j 
that  now  in  the  book.     The  other  was  a  prayer,  substan-' 
tially  the  same  with  the  present,  which  was  to  remain,  and 
the  proposed  alternative  was  because  of  offence  taken  in 
various  places,  at  the  following  words  in  it  liable  to  be 
misunderstood — "and  hast  given  them  forgiveness  of  all 


58  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

their  sins."  For  the  preface  and  the  prayer,  see  the  Ap- 
pendix, No.  33.  kk. 

In  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  there  were 
not  a  few  of  the  objectors,  who  would  have  found  no  diffi- 
culty as  to  the  proposed  alterations  in  the  service,  had 
they  not  been  combined  with  a  rubric,  considered  as  re- 
quiring the  recital  of  the  ante-communion  service,  more 
explicitly  than  before.  There  was  an  endeavor  to  divide 
the  two  subjects;  but  this  was  impossible,  as  they  consti- 
tuted but  one  proposal  from  the  bishops.  In  consequence 
of  the  adoption  of  the  whole  instrument,  the  sense  of  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  is  now  declared  in 
favor  of  what  the  bishops  have  all  along  declared,  and  that 
unanimously,  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  rubric,  pronounced 
by  so  many  to  be  dubious.  //. 

After  much  discussion,  the  proposal  of  the  bishops,  com- 
prehending the  particulars  which  have  been  enumerated, 
was  adopted  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies, 
so  far  as  is  permitted  by  the  constitution;  that  is  to  be  re- 
ferred to  the  conventions  of  the  different  states,  and  to  be 
acted  on  at  the  next  General  Convention,  mm. 

The  business  which  may  be  thought  the  next  in  impor- 
tance, is  that  concerning  the  Psalms  in  metre  and  the 
Hymns.  On  the  first  of  these  subjects,  the  committee 
were  continued;  no  progress  being  made  in  it  at  this  time. 
The  other  was  brought  to  a  consummation,  the  number  be- 
ing enlarged  to  two  hundred  and  thirteen.  There  had 
been  many  meetings  of  the  committee  on  that  work,  and 
great  pains  had  been  bestowed  on  it.  Considerable  ex- 
pense having  been  incurred  by  various  impressions  from  the 
press  of  what  was  to  be  brought  under  consideration,  there 
was  permission  given  to  a  committee,  with  a  view  to  retri- 
bution, to  dispose  of  a  copyright  of  these  Hymns  for  one 
year.  nn. 

There  was  but  one  canon  passed.  It  altered  the  for- 
mer canon,  requiring  OJIEL  year  for  the  admission  of  a  can- 
didate to  holy  Orders,  extending  the  term  to  three  years, 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  59 

unless,  in  the  diocese  to  which  he  belongs,  the  bishop,  with 
the  advice  and  the  consent  of  the  clerical  members  of  the 
standing  committee,  shall  deem  it  expedient  to  ordain  him 
after  the  expiration  of  a  shorter  term,  not  less  than  one 
year.  The  bishops  transmitted  two  other  canons;  but  they 
were  referred  to  a  committee  on  the  canons,  who  were  to 
be  in  existence  during  the  recess,  in  order  to  make  an  ar- 
rangement of  the  whole  body  of  the  canons,  with  such  im- 
provements as  they  may  devise,  to  be  submitted  to  the 
next  convention.  One  of  these  canons  restricted  applica- 
tion for  Orders  to  the  bishop  in  whose  diocese  he  had  been 
admitted  a  candidate;  unless,  in  pursuance  of  letters  di- 
missory  from  such  bishop.  The  other,  was  for  "the  deter- 
mining of  the  rights  and  the  duties  of  the  presbyters  and 
deacons  of  this  Church,  in  respect  to  residence  and  ac- 
countability." oo. 

In  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  two  days 
were  spent  in  discussing  the  project  of  a  clerical  deputy 
from  South  Carolina,  for  the  forming  of  a  society,  the  ob- 
ject of  which  should  be,  the  printing  of  books  calculated 
to  promote  the  cause  of  religion,  and  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  in  particular.  '  The  society  was  to  be  entitled — "for 
the  Promoting  of  Christian  Knowledge."  The  operation 
was  to  be  begun  with  seventy-two  thousand  dollars,  to 
be  raised  by  the  subscriptions  of  the  members;  to  be  repaid 
to  them  in  books,  and  the  capital  to  be  finally  extended  to 
one  hundred  thousand  dollars.  A  great  majority  of  the 
members  considered  the  scheme  as  not  coming  within  the 
sphere  of  congregational  business,  and  it  was  accordingly 
rejected:  but  of  these  there  was  a  proportion,  who  were 
otherwise  persuaded  of  its  utility,  pp. 

There  was  made  a  satisfactory  report  of  the  state  of 
the  Theological  Seminary.  It  was  drawn  at  considerable 
length,  by  a  joint  committee  of  the  two  houses.  In  the 
course  of  the  session,  there  was  a  settlement  of  the  propor- 
tions of  the  different  states  to  trusteeships. 

There  was  also  a  report,  considered  as  satisfactory,  of 


60  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  proceedings  of  the  Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary 
Society. 

There  was  the  continuation  of  a  committee,  with  a  view 
to  the  future  establishment  of  a  college  for  general  science, 
under  the  authority  of  the  convention;  and  to  report  on 
the  interests  of  this  Church  in  seminaries  now  existing. 

A  committee  was  appointed  for  the  ascertaining  of 
any  errors  which  there  may  be  in  the  editions  of  the 
Bible. 

There  was  drawn  up  and  adopted,  as  usual,  a  view  of 
th'e  state  of  the  Church,  by  a  committee  appointed  for  the 
purpose;  and  grounded  on  documents  from  the  conventions 
of  the  several  states. 

It  was  referred  to  the  Church  in  the  different  states,  to 
consider  of  and  to  adopt  an  amendment  to  the  .second 
clause  of  the  eighth  article  of  the  constitution,  so  as  to 
place  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  Religion  on  the  same  foot- 
ing with  the  liturgy,  in  respect  to  any  alterations  which 
may  be  proposed. 

A  pastoral  letter  to  the  members  of  the  Church  having 
been  submitted  to  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  approved  of 
by  them,  was  sent  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Dep- 
uties, and  there  read. 

In  consequence  of  a  report  from  a  joint  committee  of  the 
two  houses,  it  was  determined,  that  the  next  meeting  shall 
*  be  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  on  the  first  Wednesday  of 
jfl'^  l*  August,  1829. 

The  session  was  closed  by  prayer  and  a  psalm,  with  a 
short  address  by  the  presiding  bishop. 


The  next  session  of  the  General  Convention  began  on 
-  Wednesday,  the  I2th  of  August,  1829,  and  ended  on  Thurs- 
day, the  2Oth  day  of  the  same  month.  The  bishops  pres- 
ent at  the  opening  of  the  session,  were  Bishop  White,  of 
Pennsylvania;  Bishop  Hobart,  of  New  York;  Bishop  Gris- 
wold,  of  the  Eastern  Diocese;  Bishop  Moore,  of  Virginia; 
Bishop  Croes,  of  New  Jersey;  Bishop  Brownell,  of  Connect- 
icut; Bishop  Ravenscroft,  of  North  Carolina;  and  Bishop 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  6 1 

Onderdonk,    assistant    bishop   of   Pennsylvania,    who   had 
been  elected  and  consecrated  during  the  recess. 

The  convention  was  opened  with  a  sermon  by  Bishop 
Brownell,  from  Galatians  iv.  18,  by  divine  service,  and  by 
the  administering  of  the  holy  communion. 

The  Rev.  WilliamE.  Wyatt,  D.D.,  of  Maryland,  was 
chosen  president?  and"tlie'kev.^tlenjamin  T.  Onderdonk, 
D.D.,  of  New  York,  secretary  of  the  Hou^e_^f_CIericai  and 
Lay  Deputies.  The  Rev.  Bird  Wilson,  D.D.,  of  Pennsyl-  <*\A 

vania,  was  chosen  secretary  of  the  House  of  Bishops.  . ' 

The  Church  having  become  organized  in  the  State  of  7^*i 
Kentucky,  it  was  admitted  into  the  union;  as  was  also  the  ^ 
Church  in  the  State  of  Tennessee.     This  Church  had  been  *** 
organized,  although  with  a  fault  in  one  of  its  canons,  which 
was  strongly  recommended  to  be  corrected.     From  infor- 
mation received,  this  was  confidently  expected  to  be  the 
result,     qq. 

There  was  the  adoption  of  the  alterations  proposed  by 
the  last  General   Convention,  requiring,  in  regard  to  any 
alterations  in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  that  they  shall  be 
presented  at  one  General  Convention,   with  the  view  of 
being  carried  into  effect  by  the  next,  after  intermediate 
submission  to  the  churches  in  the  several  states;   in  like 
manner  as  is  provided  for  in  regard  to  alterations  in  the 
Book  of  Common   Prayer.     The  alterations  of  this  book,  ^ 
proposed  by  the  last  General  Convention,  were  not  acted  \ 
on  by  the  present,  having  been  found  unacceptable  to  the  ^ 
major  number  of  the  diocesan  conventions,     rr. 

What  principally  occupied  the  attention  of  this  conven- 
tion,  was  the   presentation   of  the   Rev.  William    Meade, 
D.D.,  of  Virginia,  to  be  assistant  bishop  of  the~~Church  in 
that  state;   under  the  proviso,  that  the  election  did^jnpt  \ 
confer  on  him  the  right  of  succession  to  the  diocesan  Epis-  7 
copacy.     The    evils  resulting  from  such  an  economy  were 
so  manifest,  that  there  was  unanimity  of  opinion  in  oppo- 
sition to  it  in  both  houses:    even  the  deputies  from  the  / 
diocese  in  question  not  defending  it;  and  expressing  their' 


62  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

confident  persuasion  that  the  ground  would  be  changed  at 
the  next  meeting  of  the  convention. 

The  only  difference  of  opinion  in  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies,  during  a  discussion  of  ^everal  days,  was 
on  the  point  presseoTBy  many  of^the  members,  that  in  the 
presentation  for  consecration,  it  should  be  made  dependent1 
on  the  condition  of  withdrawing  the  restriction  which  had 
occasioned  the  dissatisfaction.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was 
pleaded,  that  as  the  course  taken  in  Virginia,  however  ex- 
ceptionable, was  not  without  precedent;  as  the  .occurrence 
of  the  like  in  future  might  be  prevented  by  a  canon;  and 
as  the  deputies  from  the  state  concerned  had  come  under 
instructions  to  move  for  some  provision,  relatively  to  the 
relation  subsisting  between  a  diocesan  and  his  assistant; 
by  which  they  seem  to  have  pledged  themselves  to  submit 
to  the  declared  sense  of  the  body  now  assembled;  it  would 
be  a  reasonable  dictate  of  moderation,  to  carry  the  pro- 
posed measure  into  effect.  During  some  days,  the  defeat 
of  it  seemed  almost  certain;  but  towards  the  close  of  the 
controversy,  the  matter  took  a  different  turn;  and  the 
measure  of  presentation  was  carried,  but  not  without  the 
dissent  of  a  very  considerable  minority.  All  the  speakers 
against  it  were  careful  to  make  it  known,  that  they  had  no 
grounds  of  personal  dissatisfaction  with  Dr.  Meade;  for 
whose  character  they  professed  great  respect.* 

When  the  presentation  came  to  the  House  of  Bishops, 
they  determined  on  the  consecration,  and  notified  it  to  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.  At  the  same  time, 
they  declared  their  dissatisfaction  with  the  non-succession 
scheme  of  the  convention  of  Virginia;  resolving,  that  they 
never  would  hereafter  consecrate  an  assistant,  not  intended 
to  be  of  course  the  successor;  and  recommending  the  same 
forbearance  to  their  absent  and  to  any  future  brethren. 
They  also  prepared  a  canon  against  any  future  occurrence 


*  See  ajso  note  to  p.  17  of  Bishop  White's  sermon  preached  at  the  consecration 
of  Bishop  Meade,  printed  in  New  York,  1829.     Ed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  63 

of  the  present  difficulty:  which  canon  was  sent  to  the  other 
house,  and  passed  by  them.     ss. 

On  the  next  day,  being  Wednesday,  October  I9th,  the 
Rev.  William  Meade,  D.D.,  was  consecrated  in  St.  James'  ' 
Church,  by  the  presiding  bishop;  six  other  bishops,  to  wit,  .f, 
Bishops    Hobart,   Griswold,   Croes,   Moore,   Brownell,   and 
Onderdonk,  joining  in  the  imposition  of  hands.     The  ser- 
mon was  preached  by  the  presiding  bishop,  from  Revela- 
tion ii.  10. 

At  this  convention,  seven  canons  were  passed. 

The  first  was  principally  designed  to  provide  for  the 
reception  of  a  minister  from  another  denomination,  without 
the  delay  exacted  in  other  cases,  by  a  provision  additional 
to  what  existed  in  a  former  canon  (the  fifth  of  1820),  to 
the  effect.  It  had  been  a  matter  of  difference  of  opinion, 
whether  it  was  exacted  by  the  former  provision,  that  the 
minister  admitted  should  have  undergone  some  species  of 
ordination.  The  present  canon  rendered  this  necessary. 

The  second  canon  extends  the  substance  of  the  twenty- 
sixth  of  1808,  so  as  to  enjoin  inquiry  into  probable  reports 
of  such  offences  of  the  clergy  as  ought  to  subject  them  to 
ecclesiastical  discipline. 

.The  third,  in  addition  to  the  eighth  of  1820,  provides, 
that  on  the  deposition  of  a  clergyman,  because  of  his  dec- 
laration that  he  will  no  longer  officiate  as  a  clergyman  of 
the  Episcopal  Church,  it  shall  be  certified,  if  the  fact  be  so, 
that  his  severance  is  not  for  any  cause  affecting  his  moral 
standing. 

The  fourth  respects  a  minister's  change  of  residence 
from  one  diocese  to  another.  It  so  far  enlarges  the  sense 
of  the  thirty-first  canon  of  1808,  as  to  provide,  that  in  the 
case  of  his  being  under  any  charge  in  the  diocese  from 
which  he  removes,  a  certificate  of  his  acquittal  of  the  same 
shall  be  requisite  to  his  admission  to  any  other. 

The  fifth  made  the  provision,  which  the  crisis  called  for, 
declaring  the   succession   and   the   duties  of  an  assistant  / 
bishop. 


64  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH, 

The  sixth  abrogated  the  necessity,  in  the  case  of  a 
foreigner,  intending  to  officiate  in  a  foreign  language,  to 
wait  a  year  for  ordination.  This  provision  was  accommo- 
dated to  the  case  of  the  French  church  in  the  City  of  New 
York. 

The  seventh  was  additional  to  the  thirty-third  of  1808, 
providing  more  distinctly,  for  consent  to  a  minister's  offi- 
ciating within  the  parochial  boundaries  of  any  city,  bor- 
ough, village,  town,  or  township,  of  which  he  is  not  a 
resident. 

The  presiding  bishop  presented  to  the  convention  cer- 
tain documents  relative  to  the  Church  of  Denmark;  which 
he  had  received  through  the  medium  of  the  kind  offices  of 
Peter  Pederson,  Esq.,  the  minister  plenipotentiary  of  his 
majesty  the  King  of  Denmark;  containing  considerable 
information  not  generally  possessed.  These  documents 
have  been  deposited,  with  others  formerly  presented,  and 
in  the  possession  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Kemper;  at  whose  in- 
stance those  now  given  were  procured  by  Mr.  Pederson, 
during  his  late  visit  to  his  native  country,  from  Dr.  Mun- 
ter,  the  present  Bishop  of  Copenhagen. 

There  was  submitted  to  the  convention  the  report  of  the 
Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society;  of  whose  pro- 
ceedings there  was  expressed  very  strong  approbation, 
with  an  earnest  recommendation  of  a  more  extensive  pat- 
ronage. Sundry  alterations  of  the  constitution,  proposed 
by  the  society,  were  sanctioned  by  the  convention. 

The  proceedings  of  the  trustees  of  the  Theological  Sem- 
inary were  submitted;  and  there  was  made  a  nomination 
of  the  requisite  number  of  the  trustees  of  the  institution. 

The  committee  on  the  canons  was  continued. 

It  was  recommended  to  the  bishops,  to  consider  of  and 
report  to  the  next  General  Convention,  a  plan  for  the 
Episcopal  superintendence  of  the  churches  in  the  states 
destitute  of  bishops. 

The  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  signified  their 
wish  to  the  House  of  Bishops,  that  in  their  pastoral  ad- 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  65 

dress,  they  would  notice  the  deficiency  of  the  number  of 
clergy,  in  comparison  of  the  extent  of  the  field  of  labor; 
and  that,  with  a  view  to  a  remedy  of  the  evil,  they  would 
recommend  the  instituting  of  scholarships.  This  desire 
was  complied  with. 

The  committee  on  the  Psalms  in  metre  was  continued. 

For  the  meeting  of  the  next  General  Convention,  the 
two  houses  agreed  on  the  third  Wednesday  in  October, 
1832 — to  be  in  New  York. 

The  business  of  the  session  was  concluded  with  prayer 
by  the  presiding  bishop,  and  by  singing  a  part  of  a  psalm. 

The  next  meeting  of  the  General  Convention  was  in  the  iC<L/i 
year  1832,  in  the  City  of  New  York.     It  began  on  Wednes-  /  *  *  4 
day,  the  i/th  of  October,  and  ended  its  session  on  Wednes- 
day, the  3 ist  of  the  same  month.     The  bishops  present, 
were  Bishop  White,  of  Pennsylvania;  Bishop  Griswold,  of 
the  Eastern  Diocese;   Bishop  Bowen,   of  South  Carolina; 
Bishop   Brownell,    of  Connecticut;   Bishop   H.   U.  Onder- 
donk,    assistant   Bishop   of  Pennsylvania;    Bishop   Meade,  <" 
assistant  Bishop  of  Virginia;  BishojD_Stone,   of  Maryland ;  •** 
Bishop  B.  T.  Onderdonk,  of  Ne"w~YorkY and  Bishop  Ives,  - 
of  North  Carolina. 

The  House  of  Bishops  chose  for  their  secretary,  the  Rev. 
Bird  Wilson,  D.D.,  of  Pennsylvania. 

The  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  beginning  with 
a  full  deputation,  chose  the  Rev.  William  E.  Wyatt,  D.D., 
their  president,  and  the  Rev.  Henry  Anthon,  D.D.,  their 
secretary. 

The  first  and  principal  business  occurring  and  occupying  Y 
both  of  the  houses,  was  the  singular  state  of  things  which  ^ 
had  taken  place  in  the  diocese  of  Ohio.  The  origin  of  ity 
was  as  follows: — 

In  forming  the  constitution  ofJCenyon  College,  located 
at  Gambier,  in  that  state,  it  was  provided,  that  the  presi- 
dency should  be  necessarily  connected  with  the  Episcopacy 
of  the  diocese.  In  the  collegiate  department,  the  principal 
authority  was  vested  in  a  board  of  trustees,  to  which  that 


66  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

of  the  president,  and  of  every  professor,  was  subordinate 
and  accountable.  The  incongruity  of  this  is  obvious.  In 
the  event  of  the  charge  of  insufficiency  or  of  misconduct  in 
t  e  president,  the  trustees  must  sit  in  judgment  on  him, 
not_onl\-  in  that  character,  but  as  bishop.  If  he  should 
resign,  or  be  dismissed  from  t  Reformer  of  these  stations,  it 
must  be  from  the  latter  also. 

The  matter  was  soon  tested,  in  the  person  of  the  first 
bishop.  There  arose  serious  and  irreconcilable  differences 
between  him  and  all  the  professors;  in  which  each  party 
appealed  to  the  trustees,  whose  power  was  alike  acknowl- 
edged by  them.  The  trustees  decided  in  favor  of  the 
professors.  On  this  the  bisnop  sent  in  his  resignation; 
and,  the  convention  of  the  diocese  being  then  in  session, 
he  notified  to  them  the  act;  considering  it  as  inducing  a 
resignation  of  the  Episcopacy^  "The  Convention,  after  a 
fruitless  endeavor,  by  a  committee,  to  persuade  to  a  recall 
of  the  resignation,  declared  their  acceptance  of  it.  They 
then  proceeded  to  the  choice  of  a  successor,  and  it  fell  on 
the  Rev.  Charles  P.  M'llvaine,  of  Brooklyn,  in  the  State  of 
New  York. 

This  transaction  was  in  September,  1831,  and  there  the 
matter  rested  until  the  meeting  of  the  diocesan  convention, 
in  the  present  year,  owing  to  doubts  entertained  and  ex- 
pressed in  former  proceedings  of  our  ecclesiastical  councils, 
on  the  subject  of  episcopal  resignations.  At  the  last  dio- 
cesan convention  of  Ohio,  the  choice  of  Dr.  M'llvaine  was 
renewed,  which  brought  up  the  matter  before  the  General 
Convention,  combined  with  the  case  of  Bishop  Chase  above 
related. 

On  this  case  there  was  no  material  difference  of  opinion 
in  the  House  of  Bishops.  In  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  it  led  to  a  wide  range  of  debate  on  the  questions, 
whether  a  bishop  have  a  right  to  resign  for  any  reasons 
judged  by  him  to  be  sufficient;  and,  on  the  supposition  of 
the  negative  of  this,  whether  the  diocese  of  Ohio  be  not 
nevertheless  vacated  by  the  bishop's  abandonment  of  his 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  67 

charge,  and  by  his  retirement  beyond  jjie  limits  of  our  ec- 
clesiastical umonTwEicE  can  not  be  reasonably  stretched  to 
a  "territory  not  within  it.  Under  the  latter  of  these  heads, 
there  could  not  be  any  doubt  of  the  fact  to  which  the  argu- 
ment related,  but  it  was  earnestly  pressed  by  a  respectable 
portion  of  the  house,  that  there  should  be  adopted  concilia- 
tory measures,  through  the  interposition  of  the  bishops,  to 
renew  the  harmony  between  Bishop  Chase  and  his  late 
diocese.  This  project  miscarried,  and  it  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  held  feasible  by  any  of  the  bishops.  The  result 
was  the  recommending  of  Dr.  M'llvaine  for  consecration. 

The  bishops,  on  receiving  the  instrument  of  his  presenta- 
tion, manifested  the  determination,  that  for  the  acting  un- 
der it,  and  to  guard  against  capricious  resignations,  there 
should  be  a  canon  prescribing  the  circumstances  in  which  - 
alone  such  an  act  should  be  held  valid.  Accordingly,  the 
canon  was  prepared,  and  sent  to  the  other  house.  There  it 
excited  a  warm  opposition,  but  was  at  last  carried.  It  is 
the  thirty-second  of  the  code  now  in  force.  The  bishops 
held  it  to  be  an  indispensable  preliminary,  to  the  supply  of 
the  exigency  in  Ohio,  which,  they  thought,  might  else  be 
hereafter  pleaded,  to  sanction  what  they  considered  and 
feared  as  a  future  evil.  //. 

Out  of  the  case  of  Bishop  Chase,  and  bearing  a  relation 
to  it,  there  arose  two  incidental  subjects,  which  could  not 
but  engage  the  attention  of  the  convention. 

To  the  House  of  Bishops  there  were  communicated  two 
resolves  of  the  convention  of  Ohio,  directed  to  two  points. 
The  first  of  the  resolves  invited  the  bishops  to  exercise  a 
visitatorial  power  over  their  seminary.  The  second  made 
to  the  convention  at  large  the  request,  that  they  would  no- 
tice the  rules,  statutes,  and  other  proceedings  of  the  semi- 
nary, with  a  view  to  the  same,  as  contemplated  in  the  con- 
stitution; meaning,  to  secure  its  adhesion  to  the  Episcopal 
Church.  This  document  was  referred  to  a  committee  of 
both  houses. 

As  the  first  of  the  said  resolves  was  to  be  acted  on  by 


68  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  bishops  only,  they  declared  themselves  incompetent  to 
exercise  the  power  of  visitors  as  a  body,  leaving  to  each 
bishop  the  privilege  of  acting  ifTtfie  premises  according  to 
his  discretion. 

The  report  of  the  joint  committee,  accepted  by  both 
houses,  on  the  other  resolve,  contented  itself  with  stating, 
that  the  convention  of  Ohio  had  not  pointed  out  any  con- 
trariety to  the  doctrine,  or  the  discipline,  or  the  worship  of 
the  Church;  and  that  they  had  not  been  furnished  with  the 
copies  of  the  proceedings  which  they  were  desired  to  no- 
tice. With  the  declaration,  that  they  could  not  at  present 
accede  to  the  request  of  the  convention  of  Ohio,  they  said, 
that  they  did  not  intend  thereby  to  accept  or  to  refuse  the 
authority,  which,  by  the  seventh  section  of  the  constitution 
of  the  Theological  Seminary  in  the  diocese  of  Ohio,  is  con- 
ferred on  this  convention,  uu. 

In  this  convention,  the  canons  of  the  Church  came  un- 
der a  careful  consideration;  time  and  experience  having 
rendered  some  alterations  expedient,  and  there  having 
been  appointed,  at  the  last  convention,  a  committee  for  the 
remodelling  of  the  code;  whose  report  was  made  and  acted 
on  at  the  present  session,  ww. 

The  Church  of  Alabama  was  admitted  to  the  federal 
union,  as  was  also  that  in  the  territory  of  Michigan. 

There  was  read  a  report  from  the  trustees  of  the  Gen- 
eral Theological  Seminary,  and  a  call  was  made  on  every 
parochial  clergyman  of  this  Church,  for  an  annual  collec- 
tion in  aid  of  the  institution,  xx. 

The  prayer  which  has  been  always  used  in  the  General 
Convention  during  their  session,  being  the  same  which  has 
been  provided  by  the  Church  of  England,  was  so  prepared 
and  enacted,  as  to  be  used  in  all  our  churches  during  all 
future  sessions. 

It  was  thought  not  unworthy  of  the  assembled  body,  to 
give  directions  as  to  the  postures  to  be  observed  during  the 
administration  of  the  communion.  There  have  been  dif- 
ferent constructions  of  the  rubrics,  as  to  that  point,  the 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  69 

diversity  of  positions,   in  persons  equally  desirous  of  ru- 
brical conformity,  bearing  a  very  unseemly  appearance. 

There  being  something  wanting,  to  perfect  the  permis- 
sion given  at  the  last  convention,  of  the  use  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  translated  into  the  French  language,  the 
defect  was  now  supplied. 

The  churches  in  Mississippi,  Alabama,  and  Louisiana,  > 
were  authorized  to  associate  in  the  choice  of  a  bishop. 

There  was  an  alteration  made  in  the  constitution  of  the 
General  Missionary  Society,  providing,  that  they  shall 
meet  triennially,  in  the  place  where  the  General  Conven- 
tion shall  hold  its  session;  the  body  of  deputies  to  appoint 
the  times  of  meeting,  and  nine  to  form  a  quorum. 

There  was  corrected  an  error  in  "  The  Form  of  Private 
Baptism,"  as  it  stands  in  the  editions  of  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer.  The  error  was  pronounced  to  be  typographi- 
cal, and  may  be  perceived  to  be  such,  by  a  comparison  of 
the  form  with  that  of  the  Church  of  England:  no  altera- 
tion in  the  premises  having  been  made  by  this  Church. 

It  was  proposed  to  the  next  convention,  to  insert 
among  the  occasional  prayers,  that  provided  for  conven- 
tional meetings,  as  above  stated. 

The  bishops  ordained  a  rule  of  seniority  and  of  presi-  (   i/  2 
dency,  to  be  observed  in  their  body;  also  a  rule  of  seniority  ( 
in  relation  to  bishops-elect,    yy. 

They  also  recorded  their  pointed  disallowance  of  the  / 
union  of  the  Episcopacy  with  the  presidency  of  a  college,  \ 
designed  to  be  indissoluble,  as  constituted  in  Ohio. 

There  was  proposed  and  adopted  the  position,  that  in 
the  rubric  immediately  before  "  The  Administration  of  the 
Holy  Communion,"  instead  of  "standing  at  the  north  side 
of  the  table,"  it  should  be,  "standing  at  the  right  side  of 
the  table."  This  is  certainly  the  most  agreeable  to  the 
spirit  of  the  rubric,  and  the  most  consistent,  where  a 
church  does  not  stand  east  and  west,  with  the  table  at  the 
former,  as  were  all  the  churches  of  England  when  the  lit- 
urgy was  framed,  zs. 


70  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

In  addition  to  the  election  to  the  Episcopacy  of  the  Rev. 
Dr.  M'llvaine,  for  Ohio,  there  came  before  the  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  that  of  the  Revjphn  H.  Hop- 
kins, for  the  diocese  of  Vermont;  that  of  the  Rev.  Benjamin 

WMM^  ^^-^      |  ^^^^*»^^Wrffc^^^ 

B.J5rnith,  for  the  diocese  ofKentucky;  and  that  of  the  Rev. 
George  W.  Doane,  for  the  diocese  of  Newjersey. 

A:  .i  meeting  <>f  the  two  houses,  there  was  re;ul  by  the 
presiding  bishop  a  pastoral  letter,  issued  by  the  House  of 
Bishops. 

The  four  reverend  brethren  elected  to  the  Episcopacy, 
were  consecrated  in  St.  Paul's  Chapel,  in  the  City  of  New 
York,  on  the  3ist  of  October,  in  the  year  1832;  the  day 
concluding  the  forty-sixth  year  since  the  administrator  of 
the  service  embarked  for  England  in  the  said  city,  with  the 
v'ew  °f  receiving  consecration.*  aaa. 

After  the  said  act,  the  convention  adjourned,  to  meet  in 
the  City  of  Philadelphia,  on  the  third  Wednesday  in  Au- 
gustf  in  fhe^year  1835;  there  being  previously  recited  some 
prayers  by  the  presiding  bishop,  and  the  1 33d  Psalm  sung. 

The  next  General  Convention  was  held  in  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  in  the  year  1835,  from  the  ipth  of  August  to 
the  1st  of  September,  inclusive. 

The  session  was  opened  in  St.  Peter's  Church,  when  a 
sermon  was  delivered  by  the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  Stone; 
and  prayers  were  read  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Wyatt,  and  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Burroughs. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Wyatt  was  chosen  president  of  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies;  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Anthon, 
secretary  of  the  same. 

In  the  House  of  Bishops  there  was  prepared  an  admis- 
sion into  the  ecclesiastical  union,  of  the  diocese  of  Illinois, 


*  Prior  to  this  time,  candidates  were  consecrated  in  the  order  of  their  Doctorate. 
In  this  case,  the  rule  of  priority  in  Election  was  instituted.  This  brought  Dr.  Smith 
into  the  second  place.  In  the  vestry-room,  after  the  consecration,  Bishop  White 
referred  to  the  change  and  justified  it;  when  Dr.  Smith,  the  only  one  affected  by 
it,  expressed  himself  entirely  satisfied.  Ed. 


NARRATIVE    OF  EVENTS.  71 

,  with  their  bishop,  the  Right  Rev.  Philander  Chase,  D.D.,  ; 
who,   having   resigned    the    Episcopacy  of  the  diocese   of  \ 
Ohio,  was  considered  as  eligible  to  this  new  charge.     The 
measure  was  concurred  in  by  the   House  of  Clerical  and 
Lay  Deputies,     bbb. 

The  House  of  Bishops  disagreed  to  the  proposal  of  the 
last  General  Convention,  altering  the  rubric  before  "  The 
Selections  of  Psalms";  which  was  concurred  in  by  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  ccc. 

The  House  of  Bishops  agreed  to  the  proposal  of  the  last 
General  Convention,  altering  the  rubric  before  the  com- 
munion service,  by  substituting  the  word  "  right "  for  the 
word  "  north."  This  also  was  agreed  to  by  the  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  ddd. 

There  took  place  an  entire  change  in  the  organization 
of  the  Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society.  The 
convention  are,  in  future,  to  be  that  body.  They  are  to 
act  through  the  medium  of  a  board,  the  members  of  which 
were  accordingly  chosen  towards  the  close  of  the  session. 
Under  this  board,  and  accountable  to  it,  there  are  two 
committees,  one  for  the  domestic  department,  and  the  other 
for  the  foreign.  They  are  located,  the  former  in  New  York, 
and  the  latter  in  Philadelphia;  with  liability  to  the  change 
of  place,  at  the  discretion  of  the  board  of  missions.*  eee. 

Provision  was  made  for  the  division  of  the  larger  dio-  (. 
ceses;  when,  in  their  opinion  respectively,  from  increase  *> 
of  the  Episcopal  population,  such  a  measure  shall  become  ' 
necessary  to  the  giving  of  due  effect  to  the  Episcopacy. 
For  the  accomplishing  of  this,  there  was  required  an  alter- 
ation of  the  second  article  of  the  constitution,  which  was 
therefore  recommended,    fff. 

To  the  board  of  missions,  constituted  as  above,  the  con- 
vention committed  the  providing  for  the  support  of  two JL    «3£, 
missionary  bishops;  one  for  the  State  of  Louisiana,  and  the 
territories  of  Florida  and  Arkansas;  and  die  other  for  Mis- 

*  Both  boards  are  now  in  New  York.   [The  plan  was  changed  again  in  1877.]  Ed. 


72  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

souri  and  Indiana.  For  the  former  of  these  departments, 
the  House  of  Bishops  nominated  the  Rev.  Francis  L.  Hawks, 
D.D.;  and  for  the  latter,  the  Rev.  Ja?fc5bn~ KemperTlXD. 
In  each  of  the  cases,  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Depu- 
ties concurred,  by  a  unanimous  election,  ggg. 

There  was  also  provision  made  for  the  consecrating  of  a 
bishop  for  any  country  exterior  to  the  United  States,  where 
such  a  measure  should  be  expedient  for  the  discharge  of 
the  commission  to  preach  the  gospel  to  all  nations,  hhk. 

In  the  House  of  Bishops  certain  proposals  were  matured, 
for  the  better  exercise  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction.  But, 
the  proposals  being  sent  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  towards  the  close  of  the  session,  they  voted  a 
reference  of  the  subject  to  the  next  General  Convention, 
and  in  this  the  House  of  Bishops  concurred.  Hi. 

There  was  referred  to  certain  clergymen,  acquainted 
with  the  German  language,  the  providing  of  a  translation 
of  the  liturgy  therein,  kkk. 

It  was  determined  by  both  houses,  that  in  the  confession  in 
the  morning  and  evening  prayer,  the  voices  of  the  minister 
and  of  the  congregation  should  be  concurrent;  and  that  the 
word  "Amen" should  be  in  the  Roman  letter, toshow  that  it 
h  is  to  be  repeated  by  both.  In  the  same  letter  the  word  is  to 
be  printedTand  for  the  same  reason,  in  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
after  the  Confession,  in  the  Trisagion  and  in  the  Creed.  ///. 

Directions  were  issued,  and  committees  appointed,  for 
correct  editions  of  the  Bible,  and  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  in  future,  mmm. 

Both  houses  accepted,  from  the  Rev.  Dr.  Jiawks,  his  V 
present  of  certain  books  and  other  documents,  illustrative  \ 
of  the  early  history  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  nnn.  J 

Recent  circumstances  having  rendered  a  few  additional 
canons  expedient,  and  experience  having  suggested  the  use 
of  a  few  alterations  of  those  now  in  force,  the  said  exigen- 
cies were  provided  for.  Of  measures  to  that  effect  there  is  no 
need  of  a  recital  here;  as  the  canons,  in  their  present  form, 
will,  it  is  presumed,  be  printed  in  a  separate  pamphlet.  OQO. 


II. 

ADDITIONAL   STATEMENTS. 


A.  Page  1 6.     Of  the  Question  of  American  Episcopacy,  as 
agitated  in   the   Colonies. 

THERE  were  two  periods  which  were  especially  productive 
of  pamphlets  and  newspaper  essays  on  this  subject.  The 
first  of  these  periods  was  about  the  time  of  the  civil  con- 
troversy, which  arose  on  the  occasion  of  the  stamp  act. 
The  question  of  American  Episcopacy  was  brought  forward 
in  a  pamphlet  by  the  Rev.  East  Apthorp,  missionary  at 
Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  a  native  of  that  province,  but 
afterward  possessed  of  several  considerable  preferments  in 
England.  His  production  was  answered  by  Dr.  Mayhew, 
a  congregational  minister  of  Boston.  Several  others  en- 
gaged in  the  dispute;  among  whom  was  Archbishop  Seeker, 
although  his  name  was  not  prefixed  to  his  pamphlet,  which 
has  been  since  printed  in  his  works. 

The  other  period  was  a  few  years  before  the  revolution- 
ary war,  when  the  Rev.  Dr.  Chandler,~of  Elizabethtown, 
New  Jersey,  made  an  appeal  to  the  public,  in  favor  of  the 
object  of  obtaining  an  American  Episcopate.     There  were 
various   answers  to  the   pamphlet   and   defences  of  it,  in 
other  pamphlets  published  by  the  Doctor  and  others.     In 
addition  to  these,  the  newspapers  abounded  with  periodical 
and   other   productions.     The  author  of  the  present  per- 
I  formance  was  at  that  time  a  youth;  but  from  what  he  then 
'  heard  and  observed,  he  believes  it  was  impossible  to  have 
J  obtained  the  concurrence  of  a  respectable  number  of  lay- 


74  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

men  in  any  measure   for  the   obtaining   of  an   American 
bishop.     What  could  have  been  the  reason  of  this,  when 
there  was  scarcely  a  member  of  the  Episcopal  Church  who 
would  not  have  been  ready  to  avow  his  preference  of  Epis- 
copacy to  Presbytery;   and  of  a  form  of  prayer,   to  that 
which  is  extemporary?     It  is  believed  to  have  been  owing  " 
to  an  existing  jealousy,  that  American  Episcopacy  would 
have  been  made  an  instrument  of  enforcing  the  new  plan  . 
of  civil   government,  which   had   been   adopted   in   Great  ; 
Britain;  in  contrariety  t£_original  compact  and  future  se- 
curity for  freedom, :   a  regard  to  which  was  as  prevalent/ 
among  Episcopalians,  as  among  any  description  of  their  \ 
fellow-citizens. 

Perhaps  these  sentiments  may  be  supposed  to  be  contra- 
dicted by  the  circumstance,  that  during  the  revolutionary 
war,  a  considerable  number  of  the  American  people  became 
Linclined  to  the  British  cause;  and,  that  of  them,  a  great 
\.  proportion  were  Episcopalians.     But  this  is  not  inconsist- 
ent with  the  sentiments  expressed.     On  the  subject  of  par- 
liamentary taxation,  it  would  probably  have  been  impossi- 
ble to  have   found  in  any  city,   town,   or  vicinity  of  the 
colonies,  such  a  number  of  persons  not  vehemently  opposed 
to  it,  as  would  have  been  sufficient  to  form  a  congregation. 
Out  of  the   sphere  of  governmental  influence,    there  was 
'  scarcely  a  man  of  that  description.     When  the  controversy 
became  ripened  into  war,  some  fell  off  from  the  cause,  from 
/    dajiger  to  their  persons  and  their  properties;  others,  from 
1_  the  sentiment   that  the  public  evil  hazarded  might  prove 
worse  than  that  intended  to  be  avoided;  and  others  per- 
haps, although  very  few,  from  scruples  of  conscience.    They 
who  were  influenced  by  these,  had  stopped  short  at  the  tak- 
ing of  arms,  forwJiiQh  the  passion  was  general.     To  find 
freedom  in  this  step,  and  yet  to  withdraw  while  the  cause 
of  so  important  a  measure   existed,    may  have  been   the 
dictate  of  prudence,  but  could  not  have  been  that  of  con- 
science.    All    the   aforesaid    circumstances    operated   with 
increased  vigor,  when  the  question  of  independence  was 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  75 

forced  on  the  reluctant  public.     Had  the  British  arms  sue-  '". 
ceedTd7and  tEus  the  right  of  parliamentary  taxation  been 
established — for  there  was  no  offer  of  relinquishment  of  it, 
until^after  the  alliance  with  France — a  membership  of  the( 
Episcopal  Church  would  have  been  little  more  than  a  po- 
litical  mark,    to   distinguish    those   who    should   advocate 
claims  hostile  to  American  interests. 

To  persons  who  may  give  their  attention  to  the  colonial 
history,  the  question  may  occur — Why  did  not  the  British 
government  so  far  consult  its  own  interests,  as  to  author- 
ize the  consecrating  of  bishops  for  America?  This  question 
shall  be  considered,  on  the  ground  of  views  taken  of  past 
incidents.  Any  ministry,  who  should  have  ventured  on  the* 
measure,  would  have  raised  up  against  themselves  the  whole; 
of  the  dissenting  interest  in  England,  and  the  weight  of  that 
interest  was  morelmportant  to  them  in  their  estimation^ 
than  the  making  of  a  party  for  the  mother  country  in  the 
colonies.  The  matter  is  resolvable  into  the  ignorance  of" 
government  of  the  real  state  of  the  people,  whom  they  ex- 
pected to  govern  so  easily,  at  so  great  a  distance.  Again, 
this  ignorance  is  resolvable  into  their  depending  on  infor- 
mation received  from  persons  whose  judgments,  or  whose 
honesty,  .they  ought,  the  most  of  all,  to  have  distrusted: 
an  error,  which  hung  heavily  on  all  their  proceedings,  until 
the  period  when  it  ceased  to  be  of  consequence. 

Lest  it  should  be  thought,  that  the  dissenting  interest 
in  England  has  been  magnified,  it  ought  to  be  known,  that 
the  forces  of  the  different  denominations  of  dissenters — • 
with  the  exception  of  the  people  called  Quakers — was 
concentrated  in  a  committee  in  London.  The  author  was 
acquainted  with  a  member  of  that  committee  in  England, 
in  \TJi  and  1772,  and  knew  that  he  had  free^access  to  the 
ministry.  The  impression  then  received,  was  its  being 
an  object  of  government  to  avoid  any  thing  of  a  religious 
nature^ which  might  set  the  dissenters  in  a  political  opposi- 
tion. They  had  great  influence  in  elections  to  parliament.  | 

As  to  the  laity's  uniting  in  an  application  for  the  Episco- 


7  6  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

pacy,  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that  this,  if  to  be  found  any 
where,  would  have  been  found  in  Virginia,  a  province  set- 
tled by  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  were  still 
the  great  mass  of  its  inhabitants.  How  far  they  were  from 
favoring  the  endeavor,  may  be  learned  from  the  following 
statement. 

In  the  year  1771,  a  convention  of  twelve  clergymen, 
there  being  about  a  hundred  in  the  province,  and,  after  a 
larger  convention  had  rejected  the  measure  now  adopted, 
drew  up  a  petition  to  the  crown  for  the  appointment  of  an 
American  bishop.  Four  of  the  clergy  protested,  and,  be- 
jcause  of  their  protest,  received  the  thanks  of  the  House 
,of  Burgesses.  When  it  is  considered,  that  a  great  majority 
of  that  house  must  have  been  of  the  establishment;  that 
there  never  had  been  any  attempt  among  them  to  throw 
off  any  property  of  its  distinctive  character;  that  they 
must  have  felt  the  want  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  over 
immoral  clergymen,  and  the  burden  of  sending  to  England 
for  ordination;  there  seems  no  way  of  accounting  for  their 
conduct,  but  the  danger  resulting  from  the  newly  intro- 
duced system  of  colonial  government.  This  is  warranted 
by  the  absurdity  of  the  reasons  on  which  the  protest  of  the 
four  clergymen  was  bottomed;  among  which,  perhaps  the 
most  absurd,  was  professed  respect  for  the  diocesan  author- 
ity of  the  bishops  of  London;  it  being  notorious,  that  the 
then  bishop  and  his  immediate  predecessors  had  mani- 
fested zeal  for  the  appointment  now  opposed.  In  conse- 
quence of  the  proceeding  of  the  House  of  Burgesses,  a  con- 
vention of  the  clergy  of  New  York  and  New  Jersey  published 
an  address  to  the  Episcopalians  in  Virginia,  drawn  up  by 
Dr.  Chandler.  It  must  be  evident  on  reading  the  address, 
that  the  reasoning  of  it  was  unanswerable;  and  that,  as  the 
address  expresses,  there  were,  on  the  other  side  "only  un- 
reasonable jealousies  and  groundless  suspicions";  unreason- 
able and  groundless,  so  far  as  they  were  declared,  and 
referring  to  titles  to  civil  offices,  and  the  like;  while  there 
was  a  sentiment  silently  operating,  to  the  effect  above 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  77 

stated.  Whether  the  address  of  the  twelve  clergy  crossed 
the  Atlantic  is  not  here  known.  This  was  to  depend  on  its 
being  signed  by  a  majority  of  the  clergy  of  the  province; 
which  was  probably  prevented  by  the  public  sentiment.  It 
is  remarkable,  that  of  the  two  gentlemen  appointed  "by  the 
House  of  Burgesses  to  deliver  their  thanks  to  the  four 
protesters,  the  first  named  of  them — Richard  Henry  Lee, 
fifteen  years  after,  and  then  president  of  Congress,  did  not 
hesitate  to  furnish  to  the  two  bishops  Who  went  for  conse- 
cration, a  certificate,  that  the  business  on  which  they  went 
was  consistent  with  the  civil  institutions  of  the  American 
republic.* 

Certain  it  is,  that  no  endeavors  for  a  lay  petition  for 
Episcopacy  were  made.  Some  accounted  for  this,  on  the 
principle,  that  as  the  wished-for  bishop  would  have  a  rela- 
tion to  the  clergy  only,  the  matter  concerned  them  and 
none  others.  But  what  sort  of  a  bishop  would  he  have 
been  who  should  have  had  no  relation  to  the  laity,  except 
through  the  medium  of  the  clergy  ?  The  well-informed 
advocates  for  Episcopacy  must  doubtless  have  known  the 
imperfection  of  such  a  scheme:  but  they  who  suggested  the 
proviso  must  have  considered  it  as  a  prudential  expedient. 

Had  bishops  been  consecrated  for  America  on  the  plan 
proposed  by  Archbishop  Seeker,  the  civil  government  no 
further  interfering  than  in  the  grant  of  the  royal  permis- 
sion, it  is  difficult  to  perceive,  how  hindrance  could  have 
been  attempted  by  any  description  of  persons,  without  an 
avowal  of  intolerance;  and  Avithout  a  disposition  to  un- 
provoked insurrection,  beyond  what  can  be  supposed  from 


*  For  the  correctness  of  the  opinion  expressed  of  the  utter  inability  of  the 
British  administrations  for  the  government  of  the  colonies,  there  may  be  here  a 
reference  to  Bissett's  History  of  the  Reign  of  George  III.     This  author  wrote  in 
opposition  to  Belsham,  and  may,  therefore,  Vie  supposed,  on  the  whole,  favorable 
to  government.     But   he  points  out,  with  candor,   the  contrariety  between  the   \ 
views  of  ministers  and  the  consequences  of  their_acts — evidently  bottomed  on    ' 
false  information,  and  their  relying  on  the  persons  whom  they  ought  the  most  to   * 
have  distrusted. 


78  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

any  thing  that  passed  of  a  political  description.  That  good 
prelate's  scheme  is  unfolded  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Walpole, 
printed  among  the  prelate's  works.  From  the  circumstance, 
that,  since  the  revolution,  an  act  of  parliament  was  held 
necessary  to  permit  the  giving  of  a  beginning  to  the  Amer- 
ican succession,  it  may  be  thought,  that  the  archbishop 
was  mistaken  in  his  opinion  of  the  sufficiency  of  the  license 
of  the  king.  But  this  would  not  be  a  correct  inference. 
The  case  became  Altered  by  the  event  of  American  inde- 
pendence: and  although  there  was  legislative  interference 
in  regard  to  the  Church  in  the  United  States,  there  have 
been  bishops  consecrated  for  Nova  Scotia  and  Canada,  on 
royal  authority  only,  agreeably  to  the  opinion  which  had 
been  expressed  by  Archbishop  Seeker.  On  the  ground  of 
the  practicability  of  giving  bishops  to  America,  without 
invoking  the  aid  of  parliament,  it  was  the  opinion  of  the 
author,  at  the  time  of  the  controversy  here  noticed,  that  no 
disturbance  would  have  happened,  however  threatened  by 
some  who  were  indeed  very  violent  on  the  subject. 

But  he  is  not  backward  to  acknowledge,  that  he  thought 
he  foresaw  difficulties  to  the  Episcopal  Church  from  the 
/"other  source  here  hinted.     It  was  not  unlikely,  that  .the 
hlu  i    V  British  government,  had  they  sanctioned  an  Episcopacy  in 
J  the  colonies,  would  have  endeavored  to  render  it  subser- 
K  ,  vient  to  the  support  of  a  party,  on  the  plan  of  the  newly 
\  projected  domination.     In  this  case,  the  effects  would  have 
^been  hostile  to  the  estimation  of  Episcopacy  in  the  minds 
j  of  the  people;  the  great  mass  of  whom,  including  the  best 
informed,  and  those  who  had  the  property  of  the  country  in 
their  hands,  had  set  themselves  in  a  determined,  and,  as 
the  author  thinks,  a  justifiable  opposition  to  the  new  system. 
It  is  well  known,  that  religious  opinion  has  been  often 
made,  by  circumstances,  the  test  and  the  instrument  of  a 
political  party,  when  the  views  of  the  party  had  not  any 
more  natural  connection  with  the  opinion,  than  with  its 
opposite.     Thus,  in  England,  Arminianism  was  conceived 
of  as  allied  to  absolute  monarchy,  and  Calvinism  to  popular 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  79 

privilege;  at  the  same  time  that,  in  the  United  Netherlands," 
the  latter  supported  the  monarchical,  and  the  former  the  re-'  • 
publican  branch  of  the  constitution.  The  grievances  which 
produced  the  American  war,  were  the  result  of  claims  of 
one  people  over  another;  and  not  of  the  question,  as  to 
what  would  be  the  wisest  distribution  of  the  internal  powers 
of  either.  Besides,  it  may  be  remarked,  that  Episcopacy, 
as  now  settled  in  America,  must  be  confessed  at  least  as 
analogous  as  Presbytery — the  author  thinks  much  more  so  • 
— to  the  plan  of  civil  government,  which  mature  delibera- 
tion has  established  over  the  union;  and  to  those  plans 
which,  even  during  the  heats  of  popular  commotion,  were 
adopted  for  the  individual  states.  The  sentiment  wished 
to  be  here  impressed,  is,  that  Episcopacy,  under  the  old 
regimen,  would  have  probably  been  considered  as  subser- 
vient to  an  authority,  of  the  decline  and  final  abrogation 
of  which  there  were  causes,  which  must  have  produced 
their  effect  at  last;  if  the  effect  had  not  been  hastened  much 
faster  than  could  have  been  expected,  by  intemperate  coun- 
sels and  by  injudicious  measures. 

It  would  be  a  misinterpretation  of  what  the  author  has 
here  written,  were  it  applied  as  a  censure  on  what  some  of 
his  brethren,  who  were  before  him,  have  advanced  in  favor 
of  their  right  to  an  Episcopate.     Far  from  this,  he  honors 
their  memories,  and  considers  the  arguments  on  which  they 
rested  their  claim  as  unanswerable.     What  has  been  said,  ( 
is  merely  an  argument  from  certain  causes  existing  in  the  ) 
character  and  the  circumstances  of  the  American  people, 
to  what  would  have  been  the  effects  in  a  supposed  case, 
which  did  not  occur. 

It  may  be  thought,  that  there  should  be  allowed  a  large 
deduction  from  the  weight  of  the  observations  made,  on 
account  of  the  proportion  of  the  American  people,  whose 
conduct  or  whose  wishes  were  in  contrariety  to  the  gen- 
eral sentiment  of  their  countrymen.  But  this  is  apparent 
only.  There  were  no  persons  more  hostile  to  the  British 
claims,  than  they  who  withdrew  from  the  resistance  of 


8o  MEMOIRS   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

/them:  this  with  very  few  exceptions.     When  the  contro- 
1    versy  issued  in  war,  and  afterward  in  independence,  at  each 
of  the  periods  there  was  a  large  defection  from  the  American 
i  cause,  produced  by  the  motives  which  have  been  detailed. 

No  doubt,  the  number  of  dissentients  was  increased  by 
unjustifiable  measures  of  the  newly  erected  governments  in 
some  of  the  states.  Still,  the  sentiment  was  universal,  of 
the  sacred  nature  of  the  rights  invaded,  and  would  again 
have  had  its  effect  on  the  minds  of  the  temporary  advocates 
of  Great  Britain,  had  the  war  terminated  in  her  favor. 

Further,  the  opinions  here  expressed  may  seem  indica- 
tive of  aversion  to  the  British  character,  in  the  author's 
mind.  Far  from  entertaining  any  such  aversion,  he  prefers 
the  laws  and  the  manners  of  the  British  nation  to  those  of 
any  other;  either  from  partiality  to  the  country  of  his  an- 
cestors, or,  as  he  believes,  in  consequence  of  an  impartial 
comparison.  But  he  reasons  on  the  principle,  which  he 
thinks  warranted  by  the  experience  of  all  ages,  that  na- 
tional domination,  under  whatever  circumstances,  will  be 
tyranny.  An  individual  may  be  a  tyrant,  or  otherwise,  ac 
cording  to  his  personal  character:  but  no  people  ever  stuck 
at  any  crimes  which  advanced  their  wealth  at  the  expense 
of  those  governed  by  them;  especially,  if  it  were  at  a 
distance. 

In  short,  however  great  the  inconveniences  brought  on 

the  Episcopal  Church  in  America  by  the  revolution,  the 

-*-'  author  has  all  along  cherished  the  hope,  that  they  will  not 

A    be  permanently  so  injurious  to  her,  as  would  have  bee_n  her 

.*•  alliance  with  a  distant  power,  in  hostility  to  the  common 

interests  of  the  country;    accompanied   by   the  jealousies 

^  j  and  the   odium  which  would  have  been  attached  to  that 

,  (  circumstance. 

\f  Perhaps  it  may  be  thought,  that  a  deduction  should  be 
made  from  any  apparent  weight  in  the  theory  here  deliv- 
ered, on  account  of  the  establishments  existing  in  Mary- 
land and  Virginia;  which  would  not  have  been  overset  by 
the  British  government.  The  subsequently  prostrate  con- 


e 

i) 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  8 1 

dition  of  the  Church  in  these  states,  may  be  urged  as  a 
proof  of  the  advantages  which  would  have  attended  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  establishment.     But  this  reasoning  is  inad- 
missible, if,  as  before  supposed,  the  prostration  was  owing 
to  the  preceding  system,  of  an  amendment  of  which  there 
was  no  prospect.     Besides,  it  should  be  remembered,  that 
before  the  revolution,  the  parts  of  those  states,  now  the 
most  populous,  were  fast  settling  by  persons  differing  from 
the  establishment.     Even  in  the  old  parts,  numbers  were  t 
leaving  the  Church,  to  attend  the  ministrations  of  preach-  , 
ers,  who  had  recently  availed  themselves  of  the  very  little  < 
regard  entertained  for  their  clergy,  to  produce  a  popular  \ 
desertion  of  the  Church  itself.     Under  such  circumstances, 
it  was  hardly  to  be  expected,  that  the  establishment  would 
have  redounded  to  the  reputation  and  the  increase  of  the 
Church  generally.    It  was  becoming  more  and  more  unpop-  7 
ular;  with  some,  because  it  was  not  considered  as  promoting  ; 
piety;  and  with  these  and  others,  because  they  thought  the 
provision  for  it  a  useless  burden  on  the  community.* 


*  On  the  question  of  burden,  as  detached  from  all  other  considerations,  there  is 
a  fallacy  not  generally  perceived.  Under  the  present  system,  if  the  gospel  should 
be  supported  in  the  states  concerned,  as  may  now  be  confidently  expected,  the 
weight  of  the  expense  will  fall  disproportionably  on  people  of  moderate  means. 
During  the  establishment  it  fell  on  the  rich  in  tolerable  proportion  to  their  wealth. 
/There  is  another  fallacy  in  this  business,  in  the  reproach  brought  on  the  Church, 
F  when  it  ought  to  have  fallen  on  the  want  of  wisdom  in  the  making  of  ministerial 
I  endownents,  without  some  provision  for  ministerial  fidelity.  Hence,  however,  a 
Vgreat  proportion  oflhe  unpopularity~whicn  Ted  "to  the  seizure  and  the  sale  of 
churches  and  glebes  by  the  legislature  of  Virginia.  It  ought  to  be  remembered 
the  honor  of  Patrick  Henry,  that  he  resisted  the  said  act,  and  that  it  could  never 
be  obtained  until  after  his  decease.  This  eminent  man  has  been  accused,  of  hav 
ing  always  set  his  sail  to  the  popular  gale.  There  are  several  facts  against  the 
charge,  and  this  is  one  of  them:  for  he  had  to  resist,  through  many  years,  the 
united  efforts  of  men  hostile  to  revealed  religion  in  every  form,  and  of  other  men 
who  were  professors  of  religion,  but  cherished  rancorous  hatred  against  the  Church 
of  England  in  particular.  The  author  is  the  more  free  in  speaking  of  the  act  of 
the  legislature  of  Virginia,  as  it  will  go  down  to  posterity  loaded  with  the  reproach 
of  unconstitutionality,  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States:  although  their 
judgment  will  have  no  effect  beyond  the  district  of  Columbia.  See  Cranch's  Re- 
ports, vol.  ix. 


wi 

,  tof 
iver 
tav-  ^ 


82  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

There  is  a  remarkable  fact  in  Virginia,  countenancing  the 

sentiments  delivered.     After  the  fall  of  the  establishment, 

a  considerable  proportion  of  the  clergy  continued  to  enjoy 

the  glebes — the  law  considering  them  as  freeholds  during 

i  life — without  performing  a  single  act  of  sacred  duty,  ex- 

'  cept,   perhaps,   that   of  marriage.     They   knew  that   their 

public  ministrations  would  not  have  been  attended. 


B.  Page  17.     Of  the  Question  of  using  the  Liturgy,  exclusively 
of  the  Prayers  for  the  King  and  the  Royal  Family. 

As  the  cessation  of  the  public  worship  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  was  very  much  owing  to  scruples  on  this  point,  it 
*^may  be  thought  important,  in  reference  to  such  future 
political  changes,  as  are  rendered  possible  by  the  uncer- 
tainty of  human  affairs. 

So  far  as  the  author  knows  or  believes,  the  difficulties 
which  arose  on  this  account  were  not  of  great  extent  in  the 
southern  states.  In  Maryland  and  in  Virginia,  there  were 
many  of  the  clergy  whose  connections  with  their  flocks 
were  rendered  by  their  personal  characters,  dependent 
/  wholly  on  the  continuance  of  the  establishment,  and,  of 
|  course,  fell  with  it.  Again,  many  worthy  ministers  enter- 
tained scruples  in  regard  to  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the 
states,  without  the  taking  of  which,  they  were  prohibited 
from  officiating  by  laws  alike  impolitic  and  severe.  But  it 
must  be  seen,  that  scruples  of  this  sort  were  of  another  na- 
ture than  the  question  here  stated  for  consideration.  In 
the  northern  states  there  were  no  such  laws,  but  the  clergy 
generally  declined  officiating,  on  the  ground  of  their  eccle- 
siastical tie  to  the  liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England.  As 
they  were  generally  men  of  respectable  characters,  the 
discontinuance  of  their  administrations  had  an  unhappy 
effect  on  the  Church;  and  is  here  mentioned,  as  one  cause 
contributing  to  the  low  state  in  which  we  were  left  by  the 
revolutionary  war. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  83 

With  all  possible  tenderness  to  the  plea  of  conscientious 
scruples,  it  will  not  be  rash  to  affirm,  that  there  was  no 
ground  "for  them  in  the  promise — not  an  oath,  as  some 
suppose,  although  of  equal  solemnity — made  previously  to 
ordination  in  the  Church  of  England.  It  is  as  follows: — 
The  candidate  declares  —  "That  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  of  ordering  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons, 
containeth  in  it  nothing  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God;  and 
that  it  may  lawfully  so  be  used;  and  that  he  himself  will 
use  the  form  in  the  said  book  prescribed,  in  public  prayer 
and  administration  of  the  sacraments,  and  no  other." 

This  promise  ought  to  be  taken  in  connection  with  the  I 
pastoral  duty  generally;  and  with  the  discharge  of  it  as 
stipulated  for  in  the  promises  made  at  ordination,  which 
require  of  the  minister  the  reading  of  the  prayers,  and  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments. 

But  there  occurs  a  case,  in  which  there  is  an  external 
necessity  of  omitting  a  few  petitions,  not  involved  in  any 
Christian  duty;  so  far  as  civil  rulers  are  identified  by  name, 
or  other  personal  description.  In  such  a  case,  it  seems 
evident,  that  the  promise  is  the  most  nearly  complied  with, 
by  the  use  of  the  liturgy  to  the  extent  which  the  external 
necessity  permits. 

When  the  Church  of  England  was  oppressed  under  the 
usurpations  of  parliament  and  of  Cromwell,  the  clergy 
were  molested  in  the  use  of  the  liturgy,  because  it  was 
made  illegal  by  act  of  parliament.  But  wherever  the  use 
of  it  was  winked  at,  of  which  there  are  instances  on  record, 
they  did  not  hesitate  to  avail  themselves  of  the  indulgence, 
'  with  the  exception  of  the  political  prayers;  the  use  of  which 
would  have  been  highly  penal. 


C.  Page   19.     Of  the  Meeting  in  New  Brunswick,  in  May, 

1784. 

The  first  communications,  between  the  clergy  of  different 
states,  were  at  this  meeting.     It  took  its  rise  from  a  pre- 


(I 


"84  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

vious  agreement  between  those  of  the  City  of  New  York 
and  those  of  Philadelphia,  carried  on  through  the  medium 
of  the  Rev.  Abraham  Beach,  then  resident  in  or  near 
Brunswick.  The  substance  of  what  passed  is  as  follows: 

There  met,  from  the  State  of  New  York,  the  Rev.  Messrs. 
Bloomer,  Benjamin  Moore,  and  Thomas  Moore;  from  New 
Jersey,  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Beach,  Fraser,  and  Ogden;  and 
from  Pennsylvania,  the  Rev.  Dr.  White,  Dr.  Magaw,  and 
Mr.  Blackwell.  There  happened  to  be  in  the  town,  on  civil 
business,  some  lay  gentlemen,  who,  being  represented  by 
the  clergy  from  New  York  and  New  Jersey  as  taking  an 
interest  in  the  welfare  of  the  Church,  were  requested  to  at- 
tend. They  were  Mr.  John  Stephens,  Mr.  Richard  Ste- 
phens, Mr.  Richard  Dennis,  and  Mr.  Hoyt.*  The  author 
presided  at  the  meeting,  and  opened  it  with  a  sermon.  Mr. 
B.  Moore  was  secretary. 

The  first  day  was  chiefly  taken  up  with  discussing  prin- 
ciples of  ecclesiastical  union.  The  clergy  from  Philadel- 
phia read  to  the  assembly  the  principles  just  before  adopted, 
under  appointments  of  their  vestries,  as  will  be  related 
hereafter,  and  strongly  recommended  their  taking  of  similar 
measures.  The  next  morning,  the  author  was  taken  aside, 
before  the  meeting,  by  Mr.  Benjamin  Moore,  who  expressed 
the  wish  of  himself  and  others,  that  nothing  should  be 
urged  further  on  the  subject,  as  they  found  themselves  pe- 
culiarly circumstanced,  in  consequence  of  their  having 
joined  the  clergy  of  Connecticut  in  their  application  for 
the  consecration  of  a  bishop.  This  brought  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  clergy  from  Philadelphia,  what  they  had  not 
known,  that  Dr.  Samuel  Seabury,  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  who  had  sailed  for  England  just  before  the  evacua- 
tion of  New  York  by  the  British  troops,  carried  with  him 
a  petition  to  the  English  bishops  for  his  consecration. 

In  consequence  of  the  measure  taken  as  above  stated, 
the  gentlemen  concerned  in  it  thought,  that  during  the 

•  Should  read  Hoyt,  Colonel  Hoyt.     Former  editions  read  "Iliel."     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  85 

pending  of  their  "application,  they  could  not  consistently 
join  in  any  proceedings  which  might  be  construed  to  inter- 
fere with  it.  Accordingly,  the  conversation  of  that  day — 
on  which  the  meeting  ended — was  principally  confined  to 
the  business  of  the  revival  of  the  corporation  for  the  relief 
of  the  widows  and  the  children  of  the  clergy;  which  had 
been  held  out  as  an  additional  object  of  the  interview.* 
But  before  the  clergy  parted,  it  was  agreed  to  procure  as 
general  a  meeting  as  might  be,  of  representatives  of  the 
clergy  and  of  the  laity  of  the  different  states,  in  the  City  of 
New  York,  on  the  6th  of  October  following.  The  gentle- ^ 
men  of  New  York  were  to  notify  the  brethren  eastward, 
and  those  of  Philadelphia  were  to  do  the  same  southward. 

The  author  remarked  at  this  meeting,  that,   notwith- 
standing the  good  humor  which  prevailed  at  it,  the  more 
;  northern   clergymen   were    under    apprehensions   of  there 
,  being  a  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  more  southern,  to 
/  make  material  deviation  from  the  ecclesiastical  system  of 
j  England,  in  the  article  of  Church   government;     At  the 
!  same  time  he  wondered,   that  any  sensible  and  well  in- 
formed persons  should  overlook  the  propriety  of  accom- 
modating that  system,  in  some  respects,  to  the  prevailing 
sentiments  and  habits  of  the  people  of  this  country,  now 
become  an  independent  and  combined  commonwealth. 

For  the  communication  with  the  court  of  Denmark,  as 
contained  in  the  Narrative,  see  Appendix,  No.  I. 

For  the  application  of  the  clergy  of  Connecticut  to  the 
Archbishop  of  York,  the  English  primacy  having  become 
vacant,  and  the  successor  to  it  being  not  yet  known  in 
America,  see  Appendix,  No.  2. 


*  This  corporation,  by  mutual  consent,  and  with  a  fair  partition  of  the  funds, 
has  since  resolved  itself  into  three  corporations,  under  charters  from  the  three 
states. 


86  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

. 

D.   Page    19.     Of  the  Meeting  in   New   York,   in    October, 

1784. 

There  were  present  from  Massachusetts,  the  Rev.  Mr. 
^v    /-   'Parker;   from   Connecticut,   the   Rev.  Mr.   Marshall;    from 
I      ,  New  York,  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Provoost,  Beach,  B.  Moore, 
~  Bloomer,  Cutting,  T.  Moore,  and  the  Hon.  James  Duane, 
i     ,.  Marinus  Willet,  and  J.  Alsop,  Esquires;  from  New  Jersey, 
"the  Rev.  Mr.  Ogden,  and  John  De  Hart,  John  Chetwood, 
1  ^Esquires,  and  Mr.  Samuel  Spragg;  from  Pennsylvania,  the 
Rev.  Drs.  White  and  Magaw,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hutchins,  and 
i  Matthew  Clarkson,  Richard  Willing,  Samuel  Powell,  and 
Richard  Peters,  Esquires;  from  Delaware,  the  Rev.  Messrs. 
Thorne  and  Wharton,  and  Mr.  Robert  Clay;  from  Mary- 
land, the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith;  and  from  Virginia,  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Griffith.     The  Rev.  Dr.  Smith  presided,  and  the  Rev.  B. 
Moore  was  secretary.     The  names  of  the  members  are  set 
lAi  I  b    down,  because  they  do  not  appear  on  the  subsequent  jour- 
nals; and  because  the  short  printed  account  of  the  pro- 
//    ceedings  of  this   meeting  was  in  very  few  hands  at  the 
"time,  and  is  probably  at  this  time  generally  destroyed  or 
lost* 

The  present  meeting,  like  that  in  May,  is  here  spoken 
of  as  a  voluntary  one,  and  not  an  authorized  convention, 
because  there  were  no  authorities  from  the  churches  in  the 
several  states,  even  in  the  appointments  of  the  members, 
which  were  made  from  the  congregations,  to  which  they 
respectively  belonged;  except  of  Mr.  Parker,  from  Massa- 
chusetts, of  Mr.  Marshall,  from  Connecticut,  and  of  those 
who  attended  from  Pennsylvania:  even  from  these  states, 
there  was  no  further  authority,  than  to  deliberate  and  pro- 
pose. Accordingly,  the  acts  of  the  body  were  in  the  form 
of  recommendation  and  proposal. 


•  Several  copies  of  the  original  Broadside  containing  the  record  still  remain,  and 
a. /etc  simile  was  issued  in  1863,  the  edition  being  limited  to  twenty-five  copies. 
See  also,  Reprint  of  Journals,  III.  3.  4.  Ed, 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  87 

,       The  principles  of  ecclesiastical  union,  recommended  at 
the  meeting,  September,  1784,  are  as  follows: — 

1st.  That  there  shall  be  a  general  convention  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America. 

2d.  That  the  Episcopal  Church,  in_eachj5tate,  send  dep- 
uties to  the  convention,  consisting  of  clergy  and  laity. 

3d.  That  associated  congregations,  in  two  or  more 
states,  may  send  deputies  jointly. 

4th.  That  the  said  Church  shall  maintain  the  doctrines 
of  the  gospel,  as  now  held  by  the  Church  of  England,  and 
shall  adhere  to  the  liturgy  of  the  said  Church,  as^far^as 
shall  be  consistent  with  the  American  revolution,  and  the 
constitutions  of  the  respective  states. 

5th.  That  in  every  state  where  there  shall  be  a  bishop 
duly  consecrated  and  settled,  he  shall  be  considered  as  a 
member  of  the  convention  ex  officio. 

6th.  That  the  clergy  and  laity,  assembled  in  conven- 
tion, shall  deliberate  in  one  body,  but  shall  vote  sepa- 
rately; and  the  concurrence  of  both  shall  be  necessary  to 
give  validity  to  every  measure. 

7th.  That  the  first  meeting  of  the  convention  shall  be 
at  Philadelphia,  the  Tuesday  before  the  feast  of  St.  Michael 
next;  to  which  it  is  hoped,  and  earnestly  desired,  that  the 
Episcopal  churches  in  the  several  states  will  send  their 
clerical  and  lay  deputies,  duly  instructed  and  authorized  to 
proceed  on  the  necessary  business  herein  proposed  for  their 
deliberation.* 

The  above  resolves  were,  in  substance,  what  had  been  ( 
determined  on  in  Pennsylvania,  in  May;  and  after  having v 
been  discussed  and  accommodated  in  a  committee,  were  ( 
adopted^  by  the  assembly. 

~TFTs  proper  to  remark,  that  although  a  clergyman  ap- 
peared at  this  meeting,  on  the  part  of  the  Church  in  Con- 
necticut, it  is  not  to, be  thought,  that  there  was  an  obli- 

*  Additional  illustrations  of  the  subject  are  preserved  in  the  archives  of  the 
General  Convention.     See  Journals,  III.  62-66.     Ed. 


88  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

gation  on  any  in  that  state  to  support  the  above  principles; 
because  Mr.  Marshall  read  to  the  assembly  a  paper,  which 
'  expressed  his  being  only  empowered  to  announce,  that  the 
i  clergy  of  Connecticut  had  taken  measures  for  the  obtaining 
'  of  an  Episcopate;  that  until  their  design,  in  that  particular, 
i  should  be  accomplished,  they  could  do  nothing;  but  that  as 
•  soon  as  they  should  have  succeeded,  they  would  come  for- 
!  ward,  with  their  bishop,  for  the  doing  of  what  the  general 
'  interests  of  the  Church  might  require. 

With  this  exception,  the  principles  laid  down  appeared 
to  be  the  sense  of  the  meeting;  and  it  seemed  a  great  mat- 
ter gained  to  lay  what  promised  to  be  a  foundation  for  the 
continuing  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  the  leading  points  of 
her  doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship;  yet  with  such  an  ac- 
commodation to  local  circumstances,  as  might  be  expected 
to  secure  the  concurrence  of  the  great  body  of  her  mem- 
bers; and  without  any  exterior  opposition,  to  threaten  the 
oversetting  of  the  scheme. 

At  the  present  day,  it  may  seem  to  have  been  of  little 
consequence  to  gain  so  considerable  an  assent,   to  what 
was  determined  at  this  meeting.     But  at  the  time  in  ques- 
tion, when  the  crisis  presented  a  subject  of  deliberation  en- 
tirely new,  it  was  difficult  to  detach  it  in  the  minds  of 
many,  from   a  past  habitual  train  of  thinking.     Some  were^j 
startled  at  the  very  circumstance,  of  taking  the  stand  of  anf 
independent  Church.     There_was  a  much   more  common  ) 
prejudice  against  the  embracing  of  the  laity  in  a  scheme  of 
ecclesiastical   legislation.     Besides  these  things,   the  con- 
fessed necessity  of  accommodating  the  service  to  the  newly 
established    civil    constitution    of   the    country,    naturally  . 
awakened  apprehensions  of  unlimited  license.     Hence  the 
restriction  to  the  English  liturgy,  except  in  accommoda- 
tion to  the   revolution,  which  restriction  was  not   acqui- 
esced in,  as  will  be  seen. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  89 

E.  Page  20.  Of  proceedings  in  sundry  States,  previous  to 
the  Meetings  in  1784,  at  New  Brunswick  and  at  New 
York. 

As  this  convention  acted  by  delegation,  an  account  of 
the  said  proceedings  seems  to  form  a  part  of  the  present 
work. 

The  principles  agreed  on,  at  the  said  meetings,  were 
analogous  to  those  in  the  several  states;  with  the  excep- 
tion of  what  was  done  by  the  clergy,  individually,  in 
Connecticut. 

In  Massachusetts  there  was  held  a  meeting  of  the  clergy 
at  Boston,  September  8,  1784.  In  a  letter  received  by  the 
author  from  the  Rev.  Mr.  Parker,  at  the  time,  it  appears, 
that  the  principal  business  of  this  meeting  was  the  passing 
of  the  following  resolves,  which  have  evidently  an  allusion 
to  what  had  been  done  in  Philadelphia  in  the  preceding 
May,  and  communicated  to  Mr.  Parker.*  The  articles 
agreed  on  in  Philadelphia  will  appear  lower  down. 

Those  of  Boston  are, 

1st,  That  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of 
America  is,  and  ought  to  be,  independent  of  all  foreign 
authority,  ecclesiastical  and  civil.  But  it  is  the  opinion  of 
this  convention,  that  this  independence  be  not  construed 
or  taken  in  so  rigorous  a  sense,  as  to  exclude  the  churches 
in  America,  separately  or  collectively,  from  applying  for 
and  obtaining  from  some  regular  Episcopal  foreign  power, 
an  American  Episcopate. 

2dly,  That  the  Episcopal  Church  in  these  states  hath, 
and  ought  to  have,  in  common  with  all  other  religious  so- 
cieties, full  and  exclusive  powers  to  regulate  the  concerns 
of  its  own  communion. 

3dly,  That  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel  be  maintained, 
as  now  professed  by  the  Church  of  England;  and  uniformity 

*  See  Documents  in  journals  of  Convention,  Philadelphia,  1861,  I.,  432.     Ed. 


90  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

of  worship  be  continued,  as  near  as  may  be,  to  the  liturgy 
of  the  said  Church. 

4thly,  That  the  succession  of  the  ministry  be  agreeable 
to  the  usage  which  requireth  the  three  orders,  of  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons;  that  the  rights  and  powers  of  the 
same  be  respectively  ascertained;  and  that  they  be  exer- 
cised according  to  reasonable  laws,  to  be  duly  made. 

5thly,  That  the  power  of  making  canons  and  laws  be 

vested  solely  in  a  representative  body  of  the  clergy  and  the 

laity  conjointly;  in  which  body,  the  laity  ought  not  to  ex- 

'    ceed,  or  their  votes  be  more  in  number,  than  those  of  the 

clergy. 

6thly,  That  no  power  be  delegated  to  a  general  ecclesi- 
astical government,  except  such  as  can  not  conveniently  be 
exercised  by  the  clergy  and  vestries,  in  their  respective 
<  congregations. 

The  only  points  in  which  the  above  differ  from  those 
which  will  be  recorded  as  laid  down  in  Philadelphia,  are, 
that  in  the  former  they  provide  for  an  application  to  a 
foreign  quarter;  which  was  agreeable  to  intentions  enter- 
tained in  framing  the  latter,  although  not  expressed;  ancl 
that  in  the  fifth  article  of  the  former  it  is  specified,  that  the 
clergy  and  the  laity  ought  to  have  an  equal  vote.  This 
matter  was  afterward  settled  to  mutual  satisfaction  in  the 
meeting  at  New  York.  It  is  here  taken  notice  of,  because 
there  was  afterward  manifested  a  disposition  in  Massa- 
chusetts to  depart  from  the  principles  agreed  on;  that  the 
clergy  of  that  state,  instead  of  sending  a  deputation  to 
Philadelphia  in  September,  1785,  held  a  meeting  of  their 
i  own,  about  the  same  time,  in  Boston,  in  which  they  made 
\  considerable  alterations  in  the  liturgy.  Although  they 
doubtless  acted  agreeably  to  what  seemed  best  to  them 
at  the  different  times;  yet  this  fluctuation  of  counsels  is 
recorded,  lest  the  latter  measure,  contemplated  singly, 
should  seem  to  do  away  the  weight  of  the  principles  ante- 
cedently established. 

In  Connecticut  there  was  a  meeting  of  the  clergy,  in 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  91 

March,  1783,  the  principal  measure  of  which,  was  the  rec- 
ommending of  Dr.  Samuel  Seabury  to  the  English  bishops 
for  consecration.  This  was  an  act  of  the  clergy  generally 
in  that  state,  and  of  a  few  in  New  York;  and  is  rather  to 
be  considered  as  done  by  them  in  their  individual  capaci- 
ties, than  as  a  regular  ecclesiastical  proceeding;  because, 
as  yet,  there  had  not  been  any  organized  assembly,  who 
could  claim  the  power  of  acting  for  the  Church  in  conse- 
quence of  either  the  express  or  the  implied  consent  of  the 
body  of  Episcopalians.  They  who  consider  the  bishop  of  a 
diocese  as  related  to  its  clergy  alone,  may  differ  from  the 
author  in  this  remark.  But  although  he  has  heard  such  an 
opinion  advanced  in  conversation,  and  even  remembers  it 
to  have  been  sometimes  published  in  the  former  contro- 
versies concerning  American  Episcopacy;  yet  it  is  so  evi- 
dently contrary  to  the  system  as  gathered  from  Scripture 
and  primitive  antiquity,  that  he  does  not  suppose  it  will  be 
maintained  in  deliberate  argument.  His  recording  of  this 
circumstance  is  not  designed,  either  in  disparagement  of 
the  personal  character  of  Bishop  Seabury,  or  as  doubting 
of  the  approbation  of  the  measure  by  the  whole  Church  in 
which  he  has  since  presided.  In  regard  to  the  former,  the 
author  entertained  for  that  bishop  much  affection  and  re- 
spect, the  result  of  what  was  afterwards  perceived  in  per- 
son, of  his  good  sense  and  Christian  disposition.  As  to  the 
latter,  it  is  believed  from  what  has  been  since  learned,  that 
no  man  could  have  been  more  acceptable,  independently 
on  the  inclination  said  to  have  been  afterward  manifested, 
of  leaving  all  ecclesiastical  matters  to  the  clergy:  which 
was  done  for  a  while,  although  the  laity  have  been  since  j 
introduced  into  the  convention,  as  in  the  other  states. 
But  the  subject  is  here  noticed,  as  one  'cause  accounting 
for  the  failure  of  the  application  in  England;  a  sentiment 
confirmed  by  subsequent  information,  as  will  appear  in  its 
proper  place. 

From  letters  in  possession  of  the  author,  he  finds,  that 
in  Connecticut,  the  idea  of  lay  representation  in  ecclesi- 


92  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

astical  legislation,  became  associated  with  that  of  the  trial 
and  the  degradation  of  clergymen  by  the  same  authority. 
That  there  is  no  such  necessary  association,  is  evident  in 
the  English  system. 

In  Pennsylvania  there  was  a  convention  of  the  Church, 
which  began  on  the  24th  of  May,  1784.  The  steps  leading 
to  this  convention  were  originated  by  the  author,  in  the 
vestry  of  the  churches  under  his  parochial  care,  in  conse- 
quence of  a  previous  agreement  with  the  Rev.  Dr.  Magaw, 
the  rector  of  St.  Paul's  Church,  ard  the  Rev.  Mr.  Blackwell, 
assistant  minister  to  the  author.  The  said  vestry  opened 
a  communication  on  the  subject,  with  the  vestry  of  St. 
Paul's  Church,  and  by  agreement  of  these  two  bodies,  in 
conjunction  with  their  clergy,  notices  were  given,  and  suit- 
able measures  were  taken,  for  the  obtaining  of  the  meeting 
of  the  convention. 

The  result  of  their  deliberations  was  the  establishing  of 
the  following  principles,  as  a  foundation  for  the  future  form- 
ing  of  an  ecclesiastical  body  for  the  Church  at  large. 

1st,  That  the  Episcopal  Church  in  these  states  is,  and 
ought  to  be,  independent  of  all  foreign  authority,  ecclesias- 
tical or  civil. 

2dly,  That  it  hath,  and  ought  to  have,  in  common  with 
all  other  religious  societies,  full  and  exclusive  powers  to 
regulate  the  concerns  of  its  own  communion. 

3dly,  That  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel  be  maintained  as 
now  professed  by  the  Church  of  England,  and  uniformity 
of  worship  continued,  as  near  as  may  be,  to  the  liturgy  of 
the  said  Church. 

4thly,  That  the  succession  of  the  ministry  be  agreeable 
to  the  usage  which  requireth  the  three  orders,  of  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons;  that  the  rights  and  powers  of  the 
same,  respectively,  be  ascertained,  and  that  they  be  exer- 
cised according  to  reasonable  laws,  to  be  duly  made. 

5thly,  That  to  make  canons  or  laws,  there  be  no  other 
authority  than  that  of  a  representative  body  of  the  clergy 
and  laity  conjointly. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  93 

6thly,  That  no  powers  be  delegated  to  a  general  eccle- 
siastical government,  except  such  as  can  not  conveniently 
be  exercised  by  the  clergy  and  laity,  in  their  respective 
congregations.* 

*  The  steps  preparatory  to  the  resolves  were  as  follows: — they  were  the  first 
advances  towards  a  general  organization,  and  are  copied  from  the  original  journal 
in  possession.  i 

Philadelphia,  March  2<)(h,  1784.  (AA^ULf)^ 

At  the  house  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  White,  rector  of  Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's. 

In  consequence  of  appointments  made  by  the  vestry  of  Christ  Church  and  St.    ^ 
Peter's,  as  followeth:—  J      O/ 

"  The  rector  mentioned  to  the  vestry,  that  he  lately  had  a  conversation  with  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Magaw,  on  the  subject  of  appointing  committees  from  the  vestries  of 
their  respective  churches,  to  confer  with  the  clergy  of  the  said  churches,  on  the 
subject  of  forming  a  representative  body  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this  state, 
and  wished  to  have  the  sense  of  the  vestry  thereon.  After  some  consideration,  the 
vestry  agreed  to  appoint  Matthew  Clarkson  and  William  Pollard  for  Christ 
Church,  and  Dr.  Clarkson  and  John  Chaloner  for  St.  Peter's;"  and  by  the  vestry 
of  St.  Paul's  Church,  as  followeth: — "A  copy  of  the  minute  of  the  vestry  of 
Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's,  of  the  I3th  of  November  last,  was,  by  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Magaw,  laid  before  this  vestry,  and  is  as  follows,  (here  follows  the  above 
minute).  The  above  minute  being  taken  into  consideration,  and  this  vestry  con- 
curring in  opinion  thereon,  unanimously  appointed  Lambert  Wilmer  and  Plunket 
Fleeson,  Esquires,  on  the  part  of  this  church,  to  carry  into  execution  the  good 
intentions  of  the  said  minute." 

The  clergy,  together  with  the  gentlemen  named  in  the  said  appointments, 
(except  Matthew  Clarkson,  Esq.,  and  Dr.  Clarkson,  who  were  detained  by  sick- 
ness), assembled  at  the  time  and  place  above  mentioned. 

The  body  thus  assembled,  having  taken  into  consideration  the  necessity  of 
speedily  adopting  measures  for  the  forming  of  a  plan  of  ecclesiastical  government 
for  the  Episcopal  Church,  were  of  opinion,  that  a  subject  of  such  importance 
ought  to  be  taken  up,  if  possible,  with  the  concurrence  of  the  Episcopalians  of  the 
United  States  in  general.  They,  therefore,  resolved  to  ask  a  conference  .with 
such  members  of  the  Episcopal  congregations  of  the  counties  in  this  state  as  were 
then  in  town;  and  the  clergy  present  undertook  to  converse  with  such  persons  as 
they  could  find  of  the  above  description,  and  to  request  their  meeting  the  body  at 
Christ  Church,  on  Wednesday  evening  at  seven  o'clock. 

Christ  Church,  March  $lst. 

The  clergy  and  the  two  committees  assembled,  and  elected  Dr.  White  their 
chairman. 

The  clergy  reported,  that  agreeably  to  their  promise,  they  had  spoken  to 
several  gentlemen,  who  readily  consented  to  the  conference  proposed. 

The  meeting  continued  for  some  time,  when  it  was  signified  to  them,  that 


94  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

As  this  was  the  first  ecclesiastical  assembly  in  any  of  the 
states,  consisting  partly  of  lay  members,  and  as  the  author 
was  considered  at  the  time  to  be  the  proposer  of  the  meas- 
ure, the  principle  of  it  having  been  advocated,  about  a 
year  before,  in  a  pamphlet  known  to  be  his,  he  thinks  it 
proper  to  give,  in  this  place,  a  short  statement  of  his  rea- 
sons, in  its  favor. 

From  what  he  has  read  of  primitive  usage,  he  thinks  it 
evident,  that  in  very  early  times,  when  'every  church,  that 
is,  the  Christian  people  in  every  city  and  convenient  dis- 
trict round  it,  was  an  ecclesiastical  commonwealth,  with  all 
the  necessary  powers  of  self  government,  the  body  of  the 
people  had  a  considerable  share  in  its  determinations.  He 
is  not  setting  up  Lord  King's  plea,  of  the  people's  having  /j 

several  gentlemen  who  had  designed  to  attend,  were  detained  by  the  unexpected 
sitting  of  the  honorable  House  of  Assembly,  they  being  members  of  that  house. 
The  Hon.  James  Read,  Esq.,  attended,  according  to  desire.  After  some  conver- 
sation on  the  business  of  this  meeting,  it  was  resolved,  that  a  circular  letter  be 
addressed  to  the  wardens  and  vestrymen  of  the  respective  Episcopal  congregations 
in  the  state,  and  that  the  same  be  as  follows,  viz. — 

GENTLEMEN, 

The  Episcopal  clergy  in  this  city,  together  with  committees  appointed  by  the 
vestry  of  Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's,  and  another  committee  appointed  by  the 
vestry  of  St.  Paul's  Church,  in  the  same  city,  for  the  purpose  of  proposing  a  plan 
of  ecclesiastical  government,  being  now  assembled,  are  of  opinion,  that  a  subject 
of  such  importance  ought  to  be  taken  up,  if  possible,  with  the  concurrence  of  the 
Episcopalians  of  the  United  States  in  general.  They  have  therefore  resolved,  as 
prepasatory  to  a  general  consultation,  to  request  the  church-wardens  and  vestry- 
men of  each  Episcopal  congregation  in  the  state,  to  delegate  one  or  more  of  their 
body  to  assist  at  a  meeting  to  be  held  in  this  city  on  Monday,  the  24th  day  of  May 
next;  and  such  clergymen  as  have  parochial  cure  in  the  said  congregations  to 
attend  the  meeting,  which  they  hope  will  contain  a  full  representation  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  in  this  state.  The  above  resolve,  gentlemen,  the  first  step  in 
their  proceedings,  they  now  respectfully  and  affectionately  communicate  to  you, 
Signed,  in  behalf  of  the  body  now  assembled, 

WM.  WHITE,  Chairman. 

In  consequence  of  the  above  circular,  the  contemplated  meeting  was  held  in  l' 
Chnst  Church,  on  the  24th  of  May,  1784.  The  minutes  of  the  meeting  are  in  ' 
the  printed  journals  of  the  Church  in  Pennsylvania.  The  principal  result  was  ) 
communicated,  a  few  days  after,  to  the  meeting  in  New  Brunswick. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  95 

(been  a  constituent  part  of  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  synods, 
for  which  there  does  not  seem  to  be  any  ground;  the  pas- 
sages quoted  to  the  effect  by  his  lordship  proving  no  more 
than  that  some  of  the  laity  were  occasionally  present  at  the 
deliberations.  But  there  is  here  spoken  of  the  practice 
which  was  prevalent  before  the  introduction  of  ecclesias- 
tical synods,  of  the  holding  of  which  there  is  little  or  no 
evidence,  until  the  middle_of  the^  second  century.  The 
/  same  sanction  which  the  people  gave  originally  in  a  body, 
they  might  lawfully  give  by  representation.  In  reference 
to  very  ancient  practice,  it  would  be  an  omission  not  to  take 
notice  of  the  council  of  Jerusalem,  mentioned  in  the  I5th 
chapter  of  the  Acts.  That  the  people  were  concerned  in 
the  transactions  of  that  body,  is  granted  generally  by  Epis- 
copalian divines.  Something  has  been  said,  indeed,  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  authoritative  act  of  the  apostles  and 
the  concurring  act  of  the  lay  brethren:  and  Archbishop 
Potter,  in  support  of  this  distinction,  corrects  the  common 
translation,  on  the  authority  of  some  ancient  manuscripts, 
reading  (Acts  xv.  23)  "  elders  brethren " :  a  similar  ex- 
pression, he  thinks,  to  "  men  brethren,"  in  chapter  ii.  29; 
where  the  and  is  evidently  an  interpolation,  to  suit  the 
idiom  of  the  English  language.  It  does  not  appear,  that 
our  best  commentators,  either  before  or  since  the  time  of 
Archbishop  Potter,  have  followed  his  reading.  Mills  pre- 
fers, and  Griesbach  rejects  it.  The  passage,  even  with  the 
corrections,  amounts  to  what  is  pleaded  for — the  obtaining 
of  the  conserrt  of  the  laity;  which  must  have  accompanied 
the  decree  of  Jerusalem;  nothing  less  being  included  in  the 
term  "multitude,"  who  are  said  to  have  "kept  silent,"  and 
in  that  of  "  the  whole  church,"  of  whom,  as  well  as  of  the 
apostles  and  elders,  it  is  said,  that  "it  pleased "  them  to 
institute  the  recorded  mission.  On  no  other  principle  than 
that  here  affirmed,  can  there  be  accounted  for  many  par- 
ticulars introduced  in  the  apostolic  epistles.  The  matters 
referred  to  are  subjects  which,  on  the  contrary  supposition, 
were  exclusively  within  the  province  of  the  clergy,  and  not 


96  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

to  be  acted  on  by  the  churches,  to  whom  the  epistles  are 
respectively  addressed. 

If  then  the  matter  pleaded  for  be  lawful,  the  question  of 
the  propriety  of  adopting  it  ought  to  be  determined  by  ex- 
pediency.    That  it  was  expedient,  is  judged,  1st,  from  its 
being  a  natural  consequence  of  the  principle  of  following 
the  Church  of  England  in  all  the  leading  points  of  her  doc- 
trine, discipline,  and  worship.     We  could  not,  in  any  other  \ 
way,  have  had  a  substitute  for  the  parliamentary  sanction  ) 
to  legislative  acts  of  power.     Such  a  sanction  is  pleaded  Tor  ' 
by  Mr.  Hooker  and  others,  as  rendered  proper  by  the  rea-. 
•son  of  the  thing,  and  the  principles  of  the  British  constitu- 
tion.*    On  this  very  ground,  the  courts  of  jaw  of  that  coun-( 
try  have  always  refused  to  recognize  the  canons  of  1603,  as/ 
binding  over  the  laity.     So  far  as  they  are  a  declaration  of/ 
the  ancient  canon  law  of  the  realm,  they  are  held  to  be 
binding,  like  the  common  law,  on  the  ground  of  imme- 
morial custom:  but  such  matters  as  rest  only  on  thecfe- 
terminations   of   the   convocation,    have    been    continually 
declared,   by  solemn  judgments  of  the  courts,   to_be_jjot 
binding  on  the  laity,  for  the  express  reason,  that  they  were 
not  represented  in  the  convocation. — 2dly,  From  a^  doubt  j 
of  our  being  able  toj:arry  E_pjscopacy  in  any  other  way.//* 
The  prejudices  of  even  some  of  the  members  of  our  own 
Church    against   the   name,    and   much   more   against   the 
office,  of  bishop;  and,  added  to  this,  the  outcry  which  had 
been  made  on  former  occasions,  by  persons  of  other  de- 
nominations, that  not  spiritual  powers  only,  but  civil  also, 
were  intended,  rendered  it  very  uncertain  whether  we  could 
I  accomplish  the  design,  without  engaging  in  the  measure 
;  such  a  description  of  gentlemen  as  might  give  it  weight, 
and  show  to  the  world  that  nothing  inimical  either  to  civil 

•  "  Till  it  be  proved  that  some  special  law  of  Christ  hath  forever  annexed  unto 
the  clergy  alone  the  power  to  make  ecclesiastical  laws,  we  are  to  hold  it  a  thing 
most  consonant  with  equity  and  reason,  that  no  ecclesiastical  law  be  made  in  a 
Christian  commonwealth,  without  consent  as  well  as  of  the  laity  as  of  the  clergy." 
Polity,  B.  VIII.,  C.  vi.  8.  Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  97 

or  to  religious  rights  was  in  contemplation. — 3dly,  Without 
the  order  of  laity  permanently  making  a  part  of  our  assem- 
blies, it  were  much  to  be  apprehended,  that  the  laymen 
would  never  be  brought  to  submit  to  any  of  our  ecclesias- 
tical laws,  in  such  points  as  might  affect  the  interests  or 
the  convenience  of  any  of  them,  which,  it  is  evident,  might 
happen  in  very  many  cases:  for  instance,  to  mention  two 
of  the  most  important — admission  to  the  communion,  and 
exclusion  from  it.  And  they  would  have  the  principles 
and  the  practice  of  England  to  plead  in  their  favor,  as 
already  stated.* 

In  order  to  show  that  the  preceding  sentiments  are  not 
uncommon  in  the  Church  of  England,  it  will  be  to  the  pur- 
pose to  give  the  following  extract  from  Bishop  Warburton's 
"Alliance  of  Church  and  State,"  p.  197 — "There  was  no 
absurdity  in  that  custom,  which  continued  during  the  Sax- 
on government,  and  some  time  after,  which  admitted  the 
laity  into  ecclesiastical  synods;  there  appearing  to  be  much 
the  same  reasons  for  laymen's  sitting  in  convocation,  as 
for  churchmen  sitting  in  parliament."  On  the  question  to 
which  this  relates,  it  will  be  pertinent  to  remark,  that 
since,  according  to  what  is  held  by  all  Protestants,  neither 
clergy  nor  laity  can  add  to  the  truths  of  Scripture,  what- 
ever either  or  both  of  them  may  ordain,  must  fall  under  the  S 
head  of  discipline. 

To  what  extent  lay  interference  was  carried  in  the  Eng- 
lish reformation,  may  be  learned  from  the  following  ac- 
counts of  the  historian  Fuller.  Speaking  of  the  convoca- 
tion of  1552,  under  Edward  VI.,  he  says — "  The  true  reason, 
why  the  king  would  not  mtrust  the  diffusive  body  of  the 
convocation  with  a  power  to  meddle  with  matters  of  relig- 
ion, was  a  just  jealousie  which  he  had  of  the  ill  affection  of 
the  major  part  thereof;  who,  under  the  fair  rinde  of  Protes- 

*  Dr.  Hawks  says  that  Bishop  White  repeatedly  told  him  "that  such  was  the  / 
feeling  on  the  subject  of  introducing  the  laity,  that  had  they  been  excluded,  no  / 
union  or  constitution  would  ever  have  been  formed." — Journals  III.,  60.  Ed. 


98 


MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


tant  profession  had  the  rotten  core  of  Romish  superstition. 
It  was  therefore  conceived  safer  for  the  king,  to  relie  on 
the  ability  and  fidelity  of  some  select  confidents,  cordiall 
to  the  cause  of  religion,  than  to  adventure  the  same  to  be 
discussed  and  decided  by  a  suspitious  convocation.  How- 
ever, this  convocation  is  entitled  the  parent  of  those  ar- 
ticles of  religion  (42  in  number,)  which  are  printed  with 
this  preface  'Articuli  de  quibus  in  Synodo  Londinensi  An- 
no Domini  1552,  inter  Episcopos  et  alios  eruditos  viros 
convenerat."'  » 

Afterward,  speaking  of  Poinet's  Catechism,  Fuller  says 
—"Very  few  in  the  convocation  ever  saw  it.  But  these 
had  formerly  (it  seems)  passed  over  their  power  (I  should 
be  thankful  to  him  who  would  produce  the  originall  instru- 
ment thereof)  to  the  select  divines  appointed  by  the  king, 
in  which  sense,  they  may  be  said  to  have  done  it  them- 
selves by  their  delegates,  to  whom  they  had  deputed  their 
authority.  A  case  not  so  clear,  but  that  it  occasioned  a 
cavill  at  the  next  convocation,  in  the  first  of  Queen  Mary, 
when  the  papists,  therein  assembled,  renounced  the  legal- 
ity of  any  such  former  transactions." 

However  cautiously  Fuller  speaks,  it  is  evident  he  had 
no  faith  in  the  transmission  of  the  power  of  the  convocation 
^  \    to  the  delegates  appointed  by  the  king.     If  the  fact  could 
~fy  *v  be  established,    there  would   remain   the   question   of  the 
C   right  to  communicate,  without  a  check,  a  power  exclusively 
(  vested  in  the  whole  clerical  order,  as  this  is  said  to  be.     In 
the  controversy  between  the  Romanists  and  the  Protes- 
tants, concerning  the  sanction  to  the  principle  of  persecu- 
tion by  the  fourth  Lateran   Council,  in   1225,  the  defence 
made  is,  that  the  Pope  read  the  decrees  as  prepared  by 
himself,  and  that  they  were  adopted  by  the  council  without 
discussion.     It  is  an  insufficient   plea,   but    more   specious 
than  that  of  an  authority  claimed  for  points  not  only  not 
discussed,  but  not  heard,  and  resting  on  a  retrospect  to  the 
alleged  delegation  of  power,  if  there  should  exist  the  proof 
of  it  unknown  to  Fuller.     It  is  right  to  contend  for  the  due 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  99 

weight  of  the  clergy  in  ecclesiastical  proceedings,  but  when 
the  matter  is  carried  so  far,  as  that  without  their  permis- 
sion, there  shall  not  be  the  rejection  of  corruptions  in  con- 
trariety to  the  records  on  which  their  commission  rests,  the 
claim  is  extravagant,  and  tends  to  the  counteracting  evil, 
of  a  denial  of  the  real  rights  of  their  order. 

The  connection  of  this  with  a  pamphlet  published  in  the 
summer  of  1783,*  by  the  author,  although  without  his  name, 
in  which  pamphlet  was  the  first  public  suggestion,  tending 
to  the  introduction  of  the  laity  into  our  ecclesiastical  coun- 
cils, induces  the  taking  of  this  opportunity  of  declaring, 
that,  after  the  years  which  have  passed,  there  does  not  ap- 
pear to  his  mind  any  cause  to  retract  the  leading  senti- 
ments of  that  performance.  The  necessity  urged  in  it 
ceased  to  exist,  within  a  short  time  after  the  publication, 
and  therefore,  all  thoughts  of  the  measure  intended  to 
have  been  founded  on  it,  were  laid  aside.  But  had  Great  &"! 
Britain  dropped  the  war,  yet  continued  her  claims,  as  many  / 
judicious  persons  expected  would  be  the  case,  and  as  had 
happened  formerly,  between  Spain  and  the  United  Nether- 
lands, it  is  difficult  to  perceive  how  any  thing  materially  \ 
different  from  what  is  recommended  in  that  pamphlet,  / 

*  The  pamphlet  in  question  was  entitled  "  The  Case  of  the  Episcopal  Churches 
in  the  United  States  considered"  (Philadelphia,  printed  by  David  C.  Claypole, 
1783).  It  was  reprinted  in  1827  by  William  Staveley,  Philadelphia;  and  in  1829 
it  was  republished  from  1224  Chestnut  Street,  Philadelphia,  with  the  title,  "Bishop 
White  on  Episcopacy  "  (See  "Opinions  of  Bishop  White,"  Philadelphia,  1868, 
p.  30).  It  was  also  reproduced  in  the  Journals,  Vol.  III.,  p.  419.  The  motto  on 
the  title  page  was  from  Hooker:  "To  make  new  articles  of  faith  and  doctrine,  no 
man  thinketh  it  lawful;  new  laws  of  government,  what  commonwealth  or  church  is 
there  which  maketh  not  at  one  time  or  another?  "  Yet  Bishop  White,  no  more  than 
Hooker,  dreamed  of  any  departure  from  the  primitive  and  apostolic  Church,  while 
the  nature  of  his  proposition  is  explained  in  the  present  work.  It  may  be  added, 
however,  that  the  blank  leaves  of  a  copy  of  a  Charge  printed  in  1832  bear  some 
additional  explanations  in  his  own  hand.  These  leaves  have  been  reproduced  in 
fac  simile  by  his  grandson,  Thomas  H.  Montgomery,  Esq.  The  Bishop  says  that  \ 
his  pamphlet  was  put  forth  at  a  time  when  it  was  thought,  that,  in  case  American 
Independence  was  virtually  achieved,  it  would  not  be  acknowledged  by  England,  j. 
and,  consequently,  that  the  succession  could  not  be  obtained.  Ed. 


100  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

could  have  continued  us,  as  a  religious  society,  in  exist- 
ence.* Soon  after  the  publication  of  the  pamphlet,  the 
author  found  himself  in  danger  of  being  involved  in  a  dis- 
pute with  the  clergy  of  Connecticut,  in  the  name  of  whom, 
assembled  in  convention,  their  secretary,  the  Rev.  Abra- 
ham Jarvis,  addressed  a  letter,  complaining  of  the  perform- 
ance, although  doubtless  mistaking  the  object  of  it.  The 
letter  was  answered — it  is  hoped,  in  a  friendly  manner — and 
there  the  matter  ended.  The  same  convention,  in  the  ad- 
dress sent  by  them  to  the  Archbishop  of  York,  alluded  to 
the  pamphlet,  as  evidence  of  a  design  entertained  to  set  up 
an  Episcopacy,  on  the  ground  of  presbyterial  and  lay 
authority.  No  personal  animosity  became  the  result  of 
this  misapprehension;  and  other  events  have  manifested 
consent  in  all  matters  essential  to  ecclesiastical  discipline. 
Before  the  author's  subsequent  visit  to  England,  he  knew 
that  his  pamphlet  had  been  in  the  hands  of  the  Archbishop 
— not  the  prelate  to  whom  the  convention  had  addressed 
their  letter — of  York,  the  chair  of  Canterbury  being  re- 
cently vacated  by  the  decease  of  Dr.  Cornwallis,  and  the 
appointment  of  his  successor  being  not  yet  known  in 
America.  The  latter,  Archbishop  Moore,  did  not  express 
any  dissatisfaction  with  the  pamphlet,  or  with  the  author 
on  its  account,  nor  has  any  other  English  prelate,  so  far  as 
is  known  to  him.  It  had  been  enclosed  to  Mr.  Adams,  the 
American  minister,  when  there  was  officially  sent  to  him 
the  address  of  the  convention  of  1785,  to  the  archbishops 
and  bishops  of  England,  and  was  by  him  delivered  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.! 


•  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  under  such  circumstances,  the  non-juring  bishops 
of  Scotland,  laboring  under  penal  laws,  not  executed  indeed,  but  to  which  they  were 
obnoxious,  and  studying  to  live  in  quiet  submission  to  an  authority  which  they  did  not 
acknowledge,  would  have  provoked  it  by  the  measure  in  question.  It  is  equally 
improbable,  that  any  kingdom,  the  establishment  of  which  was  Protestant  and  Epis- 
copalian, would  have  provoked  Great  Britain  by  an  intercourse  with  those  whom 
she  would  have  considered  as  her  subjects  in  rebellion. 

f  The  pamphlet,  written  at  a  time  when  there  were  few  Episcopalian  pulpits  in 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  IOI 

On  the  communication  from  Connecticut,  it  will  not  be 
offensive  at  the  present  day,  to  make  the  following  remarks. 

There  pervades  it  the  defect,  of  not  distinguishing  be- 
tween the  then  state  of  public  concerns,  and  as  they  stood 
when  the  pamphlet  was  published.  Nearly  a  year,  and  the 
acknowledgment  of  independence,  had  intervened.  The  in- 
timation in  the  letter,  that  the  author  of  the  pamphlet  re- 
garded Episcopacy  no  further  than  for  the  satisfying  of  the 
people,  and  thus  the  prospect  was  held  out  of  obtaining  it 
at  a  future  time,  would  have  been  wounding  to  his  feelings, 
had  his  brethren  of  Connecticut  possessed  a  knowledge  of 
him.  They  were,  at  that  time,  strangers  to  one  another. 
The  intimated  suspicion  was  then  resolved,  and  is  now  re- 
solved by  him  on  whom  it  fell,  into  a  difference  of  appre- 
hension as  to  the  means  of  accomplishing  the  same  end. 
The  writer  of  the  pamphlet,  although  aware  that  there  are 
occasions  of  defending  Episcopacy  against  opposite  preten- 
sions, entertained  the  opinion,  that  the  most  improper  is 
when  the  subject  under  discussion  concerned  the  Episcopal 
Church  alone.  The  members  of  this  Church  were  supposed 
to  have  been  satisfied  with  the  principles  on  which  they 


the  United  States  from  which  the  sound  of  the  gospel  was  heard,  was  to  the  follow- 
ing effect: — 

It  proposed  the  combining  of  the  clergy  and  of  representatives  of  the  congrega- 
tions, in  convenient  districts,  with  a  representative  body  of  the  whole,  nearly  on 
the  plan  subsequently  adopted.  This  ecclesiastical  representative  was  to  make  a 
declaration  approving  of  Episcopacy,  and  professing  a  determination  to  possess  the 
succession  when  it  could  be  obtained;  but  they  were  to  carry  the  plan  into  imme- 
diate act.  The  expedient  was  sustained  by  the  plea  of  necessity,  and  by  opinions 
of  various  authors  of  the  Church  of  England,  acknowledging  a  valid  ministry  under 
circumstances  similar  to  those  of  the  existing  case,  although  less  imperious.  It  was 
also  alleged,  that  as  much  as  what  was  now  proposed  might  be  seen  to  be  implied, 
in  the  ground  on  which  Episcopacy  rests  in  the  institutions  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and  in  the  defences  of  it  by  her  most  celebrated  divines.  Although  reference 
was  had  to  the  position  of  the  Church,  that  "from  the  apostles'  time,  there  have 
been  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  the  three  orders,  of  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons"; 
nothing  was  said  in  proof  of  the  fact,  because  it  was  not  questioned  in  this  Church, 
and  because  argument  to  the  effect  would  have  been  indiscreet,  as  to  be  stated 
above. 


102  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

had  acted,  and  which  they  still  professed.  To  have  in- 
volved the  merits  of  those  principles  with  the  object  in 
view,  would  have  given  a  plausible  pretense  for  the  inter- 
ference of  those  who  might  be  disposed  to  defeat  the  meas- 
ure in  contemplation. 

It  is  difficult,  in  avoiding  one  extreme,  not  to  fall  under 
the  appearance  of  its  opposite.  Many  years  after  the  pub- 
lication of  the  pamphlet,  a  clergyman  of  standing  in  an 
anti-episcopalian  society,  alleged  some  passages  of  the 
performance  as  sustaining  ordination  not  episcopal.  But 
he  had  the  candor  publicly  to  acknowledge  his  mistake, 
when  it  was  pointed  out  to  him. 

For  the  communication  from  the  clergy  of  Connecticut, 
see  Appendix,  No.  3. 

It  is  no  slight  instance  of  the  proneness  to  govern  too 
much,  and  of  the  peculiar  liability  to  the  error  in  a  collec- 
tive body,  that  during  the  war  of  the  Revolution,  the  legis- 
lature of  Maryland,  although  consisting  of  men  of  various 
denominations,  took  up  the  subject  of  organizing  the 
Church,  and  particularly  of  appointing  ordainers  to  the 
ministry.  A  clergyman  of  weight  of  character — the  Rev. 
Samuel  Keene — actuated  by  laudable  ardor,  repaired  to 
Annapolis,  was  heard  before  the  house,  and  was  considered 
as  principally  influential  in  producing  an  abandonment  of 
the  design.  Perhaps  the  hasty  enterprise  was  over-ruled 
to  good;  for  almost  as  soon  as  there  became  known  the 
happy  event  of  peace,  there  were  held  two  conventions  in 
Maryland;  the  first,  on  the  I3th  of  August,  1783,  and  the 
other,  on  the  22d  of  June,  1784.  The  proceedings  of  these 
conventions,  with  measures  taken  at  other  times  and  in 
other  matters  by  the  clergy  of  that  state,  were  chiefly  orig- 
inated and  conducted  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  who,  in  his 
residence  there,  during  the  seizure  of  the  charter  rights  of 
the  College  of  Philadelphia,  exerted  his  excellent  talents 
in  these  and  in  other  public  works. 

The  principal  business  of  the  convention  in  August,  1783, 
was  the  making  of  "A  declaration  of  certain  fundamental 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  103 

rights  and  liberties  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of 
Maryland,"  consisting  of  the  following  articles : — 

ist.  We  consider  it  as  the  undoubted  right  of  the  said/  /  0  ,j 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  common  with  other  Chris- 
tian churches  Tinder  the  American  revolution,  to  complete 
and  preserve  herself  as  an  entire  Church,  agreeably  to  her 
ancient  usages  and  professions;  and  to  have  a  full  enjoy-  « 
ment  and  free  exercise  of  those  purely  spiritual  powers, 
which  are  essential  to  the  being  of  every  Church  or  congre- 
gation of  the  faithful,  and  which,  being  derived  from  Christ 
and  His  apostles,  are  to  be  maintained  independent  of  every 
foreign  or  other  jurisdiction,  so  far  as  may  be  consistent 
with  the  civil  rights  of  society. 

2d.  That  ever  since  the  reformation,  it  hath  been  the 
received  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  which  we  are  members 
(and  which,  by  the  constitution  of  this  state,  is  entitled  to  a 
perpetual  enjoyment  of  certain  property  and  rights,  under 
the  denomination  of  the  Church  of  England),  "  That  there 
be  three  orders  of  ministers  in  Christ's  Church,  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons,"  and  that  an  Episcopal  ordination  and 
commission  are  necessary  to  the  valid  administration  of  the 
sacraments,  and  the  due  exercise  of  the  ministerial  function 
in  the  said  Church. 

3d.  That  without  calling  in  question  the  rights,  modes, 
and  forms,  of  any  other  Christian  Churches  or  societies,  or 
wishing  the  'least  contest  with  them  on  that  subject,  we 
consider  and  declare  it  to  be  an  essential  right  of  the  said 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  to  have  and  enjoy  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  said  three  orders  of  ministers  forever,  so 
far  as  concerns  matters  purely  spiritual,  and  that  no  per- 
sons, in  the  character  of  ministers,  except  such  as  are  in 
the  communion  of  the  said  Church,  and  duly  called  to  the 
ministry  by  regular  Episcopal  ordination,  can  or  ought  to 
be  admitted  into,  or  enjoy,  any  of  the  churches,  chapels, 
glebes,  or  other  property,  formerly  belonging  to  the  Church 
of  England  in  this  state,  and  which,  by  the  constitution  and 
form  of  government,  is  secured  to  the  said  Church  forever, 


104  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

by_whatsoever  name  she,  the  said  Church,  or  her  superior 
order  of  ministers,  may  in  future  be  denominated. 

4th.  That  as  it  is  the  right,  so  it  will  be  the  duty  of  the 
said  Church,  when  duly  organized,  constituted,  and  repre- 
sented in  a  synod  or  convention  of  the  different  orders  of 
her  ministers  and  people,  to  revise  her  liturgy,  forms  of 
prayer,  and  public  worship,  in  order  to  adapt  the  same  to 
the  late  revolution,  and  other  local  circumstances  of  Amer- 
ica; which,  it  is  humbly  conceived,  will  and  may  be  done, 
without  any  other  or  farther  departure  from  the  venerable 
order  and  beautiful  forms  of  worship  of  the  Church  from 
which  we  sprung,  than  may  be  found  expedient  in  the 
change  of  our  situation  from  a  daughter  to  a  sister  Church. 

In  the  convention  of  June,  1784,  which  included  lay  dep- 
uties from  the  different  parishes,  the  aforesaid  declaration 
was  again  approved,  and  certain  fundamental  principles 
of  ecclesiastical  government  were  established,  of  which 
the  following  is  recorded  on  the  printed  journal  as  the 
substance: — 

1.  That  none  of  the  orders  of  the  clergy,  whether  bishops, 
priests,  or  deacons,  who  may  be  under   the    necessity  of 
obtaining  ordination  in  any  foreign  state,  with  a  view  to 
officiate  or  settle  in  this  state,  shall  at  the  time  of  their 
ordination,  or   at   any  time   afterward,   take   or   subscribe 
any  obligation  of  obedience,  civil  or  canonical,  to  any  for- 
eign power  or  authority  whatsoever,  nor  be  admissible  into 
the  ministry  of  this  Church,  if  such  obligations  have  been 
taken  for  a  settlement  in  any  foreign  country,  without  re- 
nouncing the  same,  by  taking  the  oaths  required  by  law,  as 
a  test  of  allegiance  to  this  state. 

2.  According  to  what  we  conceive  to  be  of  true  apostolic 
institution,  the  duty  and  office  of  a  bishop  differs  in  nothing 
from  that  of  other  priests,  except  in  the  power  of  ordination 
and  confirmation,  and  in  the  right  of  precedency  in  ecclesi- 
astical  meetings  or  synods,  and  shall  accordingly  be  so  ex- 
ercised in  the  Church,  the  duty  and  office  of  priests  and 
deacons  remaining  as  heretofore.     And  if  any  further  dis- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  105 

tinctions  and  regulations,  in  the  different  orders  of  the 
ministry,  should  be  found  necessary  for  the  good  govern- 
ment of  the  Church,  the  same  shall  be  made  and  estab- 
lished by  the  joint  voice  and  authority  of  a  representative 
body  of  the  clergy  and  laity,  at  future  ecclesiastical  synods 
or  conventions. 

3.  The  third  section  is  intended  to  define  or  discriminate 
some  of  the  separate  rights  and  powers  of  the  clergy,  and 
was  proposed  and  agreed  to  as  follows,  viz.,  that  the  clergy     ' 
shall  be  deemed  adequate  judges  of  the  ministerial  commis- 
sion and  authority,  which  is  necessary  to  the  due  adminis- 
tration of  the  ordinances  of  religion  in  their  own  Church, 
and  of  the  literary,  moral,  and  religious  qualifications  and 
abilities  of  persons  to  be  nominated  and  appointed  to  the 
different  orders  of  the  ministry;  but  the  approving  and  re-    *• 
ceiving  such  persons  to  any  particular  cure,  duty  or  parish, 
when  so  nominated,  appointed,  set  apart,  consecrated,  and 
ordained,  is  in  the  people,  who  are  to  support  them  and  to 
receive  the  benefit  of  their  ministry. 

4.  The  fourth  section  provides,  that  ecclesiastical  con- 
ventions or   synods   of  this    Church   shall    consist   of  the 
clergy,  and  one  lay-delegate  or  representative  from  each 
vestry  or  parish,  or  &.  majority  of  the  same,  and  shall  be 
held  annually  on  the  fourth  Tuesday  of  October,   unless 
some  canon  or  rule  should  be  made  at  some  future  conven- 
tion for  altering  the  time  of  meeting,  or  for  meeting  oftener 
than  once  a  year,  or  not  so  often,  or  with  a  larger  or  small- 
er representation  of  the  Church,  as  may  be  judged  neces- 
/sary.     But  fundamental  rules,  once  duly  made,  shall  not  be 
altered,  unless  two  thirds  of  such  majority,  as  aforesaid, 
duly  assembled,  shall  agree  therein. 

The  following  heads  of  additional  articles  were  set  down 
for  the  consideration  of  the  next  convention. 

I.  That  the  power  and  authority  necessary  for  reclaiming  I 
or  excluding  scan'dalous  members,  whether  lay  or  clerical,  (/ 
and  all  jurisdiction  with  regard  to  offenders,  be  exercised  A  ^ 
only  by  a  representative  body  of  clergy  and  laity  jointly. 


•    106  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

& 

r  Q  x       2.  That  the  power  of  suspending  or  dismissing  clergy- 
,    '\  men  from  the  exercise  of  their  ministry,  in  any  particular 
S  church,  parish,  or  district,  be  by  the  like  authority. 

3.  That  all  canons  or  laws  for  church  government,  and 
all  alterations,  changes,  and  reforms,  in  the  Church  service 
and  liturgy,  or_inpointsof  doctrine  to  be  professed  and 
taught  in  the^ ChurchTshall  also  be  by  the  like  authority. 

The  proceedings  of  these  conventions,  besides  the  cir- 
cumstance of  their  showing  an  accommodation  to  the  civil 
system,  by  the  introduction  of  the  laity,  gave  great  offence 
to  some  of  the  clergy,  by  the  definition  of  the  authority  of 
a  bishop,  in  the  second  of  the  articles  established.  It  is, 
evidently,  the  much  controverted  position  of  <S£U  Jerome. 
The  author  does  not  think  it  accurate:  and  although  his 
principles  on  the  subject  of  Episcopacy  allow  of  an  accom- 
modation of  its  powers  to  the  circumstances  of  the  Church, 
_at  different  times,  he  was  afraid  of  there  arising  some  incon- 
venience from  the  asserting,  as  a  fundamental  principle,  of 
what  was  in  the  opposite  extreme  to  that  of  the  over- 
strained authorities  of  the  office  maintained  by  others. 

In  consequence  of  the  recommendation  and  proposal  of 

'  U      i     the  meeting  of  1784,  in  New  York,  there  was  a  convention 

^      of  the   clergy   of  South    Carolina,    at    Charleston,    in    the 

spring  of  1785.     This  was  the  state  in  which  there  was  the 

most  to  be  apprehended  an  opposition  to  the  very  principle 

of  Episcopacy,  from  its  being  connected,  in  the  minds  of 

some  people,  with  the  idea  of  an  attachment  to  the  British 

I  government.     The  citizens  of  South  Carolina  were  the  last 

I  visited  by  the  British  armies,  and  had  suffered  more  than 

'  any  others  by  their  ravages.     The  truth  is,  there  was  real 

danger  of  an  opposition  in  the  convention,  to  a  compliance 

with  the  invitation  given.     But  the  danger  was  warded  off, 

by  a  proposal  made  by  the  Rev.  Robert  Smith,  to  accom-  fi 

pany  their  compliance  with  the  measure,  by  its  being  un-  j 

derstood,  that  there  was  to  be  no  bishop  settled  in  that 

state.     Such  a  proposal,  from  the  gentleman  who,  it  was 

presumed,    would   be   the   bishop,    were   there   to   be   any 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  JO? 

chosen,  had  the  effect  intended.  Some  gentlemen,  it  is 
said,  declared  in  conversation,  that  they  had  contemplated 
an  opposition,  but  were  prevented  by  this  caution. 

Besides  the  conventions  which  have  been  mentioned, 
there  were  one  in  New  York,  and  another  in.  New  Jersey, 
in  the  summer  of  1785.  But  as  their  proceedings  extended 
no  further  than  to  the  appointing  of  deputies  to  the  Gen- 
eral Convention,  it  is  not  necessary  to  notice  them  any 
further,  than  is  dictated  by  this  circumstance. 


F.  Page  22.     Of  the  General  Convention  in  Philadelphia,.^ 

in  September  and  October,  1785. 

\J^ 

The  president  of  this  convention  was  Dr.  White,  and  the 
secretary  was  the  Rev.  Dr.  Griffith. 

There  being  journals  of  this  convention,  and  of  the  con- 
ventions following,  the  matter  of  those  journals  will  riot 
be  repeated  in  this  work,  except  so  far  as  may  be  thought 
necessary  to  the  sense  of  it,  the  design  being  principally 
the  communicating  of  facts  within  the  knowledge  and  the 
recollection  of  the  narrator,  tending  to  throw  light  on  what 
has  been  recorded.  The  statements  and  the  remarks  to  be 
now  offered  will  be  arranged  under  the  heads  of  sundry 
sections. 

Section  I.     Of  the  General  Ecclesiastical  Constitution. 

It  has  been  seen,  that  in  the  preceding  year,  at  New 
York,  a  few  general  principles,  tending  to  the  organizing 
of  the  Church,  had  been  recommended  to  the  churches 
represented,  and  proposed  to  those  not  represented.  As 
all  the  articles  excej3t_the^  fourth,  which  recognized  the 
English  liturgy,  with  the  exception  of  the  political  parts  of 
it,  were  adopted  by  the  present  convention,  they  became 
a' bond  of  union,  and  indeed,  the  only  one  acted  under, 
until  the  year  1789.  For  as  to  the  general  constitution, 


IOS  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

framed  at  the  period  now  before  us,  it  stood  on  recom-l 
mendation  only,  and  was  of  no  use,  except  in  helping  ton 
convince  those  who  were  attached  to  that  mode  of  trans-  \ 
acting  business,  that  it  was  very  idle  to  bring  gentlemen , 
together  from  different  states  for  the  purpose  of  such  in-' 
conclusive  proceedings. 

The  fifth  and  the  eighth  articles  of  this  proposed  con- 
stitution deserve  particular  notice,  because  they  have  been 
subjects  of  considerable  conversation  and  censure. 


The  former  of  these  articles  provided,  that  every  bishop 

should  be  a  member  of  the  convention  "ex  official     Ac- 

'  cordingly,  the  article  was  loudly  objected  to  by  the  clergy 

1  to  the  eastward,  because  of  its  not  providing  for  Episcopal 

presidency. 

The  constitution  was  drafted  by  the  author,  in  a  sub- 
committee, a  part  of  a  general  committee,  consisting  of  a 
clergyman  and  a  layman  from  each  state;  and  originally 
\  provided,  that  a  bishop,  if  any  were  present,  should  preside. 
In  the   sub-committee,   a  gentleman,   without  much  con- 
sideration of  the  subject,  and  contrary  to  what  his  good 
sense,  with  such  an  advantage,  would  have  dictated,  ob- 
jected to  the  clause;  and  insisted,  that  he  had  read,  although 
'  he  could  not  recollect  in  what  book,  that  this  had  not  been 
,  a  prerogative  of  bishops  in  ancient  ecclesiastical  assemblies. 
The  objection  was  overruled,  by  all  the  other  members  of 
the  sub-committee.     But  when  the  instrument,  after  passing 
in  the  general  committee,  was  brought  into  the  convention, 
|  the  same  gentleman,  not  expecting  to  succeed,  and  merely, 
i  as  he  afterwards  said,  to  be  consistent,  made  a  motion  to 
J  strike  out  the  clause.     Contrary  to   expectation,   he   was 
,  supported  by  another  lay  gentleman,  who  took  an  active 
part  in  all  the  measures,  and  who,  in  the  sub-committee, 
had  been   of  another  mind.     Thus  a  debate  was  brought 
.on,  which  produced  more  heat  than  any  thing  else  that 
(  happened  during  the  session.     As  the  voting  was  by  orders, 
the  clergy,  who,  with  the  exception  of  one  gentleman,  were 
for  the  clause,  might  have  quashed  the  whole  article.     But 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  109 

this  appeared  to  them  to  be  wrong;  because  it  contained 
nothing  contrary  to  the  principle  of  Episcopal  presidency; 
and  the  general  object  was  such  as  ought  to  have  been 
provided  for.  Accordingly,  the  article  passed,  as  it  stands 
on  the  journal;  that  is,  with  silence  as  to  the  point  in 
question.  It  was  considered,  that  practice  might  settle 
what  had  better  be  provided  for  by  law;  and  that  even 
such  provision  might  be  the  result  of  a  more  mature  con- 
sideration of  the  subject.  The  latter  expectation  was  jus- 
tified by  the  event. 

.  The  other  article  provided,  that  every  clergyman  should 
be  amenable  to  the  convention  of  the  state  to  which  he 
should  belong.  This  was  objected  to  by  the  English  bish- 
ops; as  appears  in  the  letter  of  the  archbishops  of  Canter- 
bury and  York;  who  there  complain,  that  it  is  "a  degra- 
dation of  the  clerical,  and  much  more  of  the  Episcopal  >, 
character."  The  foundation  of  this  complaint,  like  that  of 
the  other,  was  rather  in  omission,  than  in  any  thing  pos- 
itively declared.  For  the  bishop's  being  amenable  to  the 
convention  in  the  state  to  which  he  belonged,  does  not 
necessarily  involve  any  thing  more  than  that  he  should  be 
triable  by  laws  of  their  enacting,  himself  being  a  part  of  the 
body:  and  it  did  not  follow,  that  he  might  be  deposed  or 
censured,  either  by  laymen  or  by  presbyters.  This,  how- 
ever, ought  to  have  been  guarded  against:  but  to  have 
attempted  it,  while  the  convention  were  in  the  temper 
excited  by  the  altercations  concerning  the  fifth  article, 
would  have  been  to  no  purpose. 

In  this  whole  business,  there  was  encountered  a  preju- 
dice entertained  by  many  of  the  clergy  in  other  states,  who 
thought,  that  nothing  should  have  been  done  towards  the 
organizing  of  the  Church  until  the  obtaining  of  the  Epis- 
copacy. This  had  been  much  insisted  on,  in  the  preceding 
year,  in  New  York.  Let  us — it  was  said — first  have  a 
head,  and  then  let  us  proceed  to  regulate  the  body.  It 
was  answered  on  that  occasion — let  us  gather  the  scattered 
limbs,  and  then  let  the  head  be  superadded.  Certainly, 


1 10  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  different  Episcopalian  congregations  knew  of  no  union  f 
before  the  revolution;  except  what  was  the  result  of  the) 
connection  which  they  in  common  had  with  the  Bishop  of  i 
London.  The  authority  of  that  bishop  being  withdrawn, 
what  right  had  the  Episcopalians  in  any  state,  or  in  any 
one  part  of  it,  to  choose  a  bishop  for  those  in  any  other  ? 
And  until  a  union  were  effected,  what  is  there  in  Chris- 
tianity generally,  or  in  the  principles  of  this  Church  in 
particular,  to  hinder  them  from  taking  different  courses  in 
different  places,  as  to  all  things  not  necessary  to  salvation  ? 
Which  might  have  produced  different  liturgies,  different 
articles,  Episcopacy  from  different  sources,  and,  in  short, 
very  many  churches,  instead  of  one  extending  over  the 
United  States;  and  that,  without  any  ground  for  the  charge 
of  schism,  or  of  the  invasion  of  one  another's  rights.  The 
course  taken  has  embraced  all  the  different  congregations. 
It  is  far  from  being  certain,  that  the  same  event  would  have 
been  produced  by  any  other  plan  that  might  have  been  de- 
vised. For  instance,  let.it  be  supposed,  that  in  any  district 
of  Connecticut,  the  clergy  and  the  people,  not  satisfied  with 
the  choice  made  of  Bishop  Seabury,  or  with  the  contem- 
plated plan  of  settlement,  had  acted  for  themselves,  instead 
of  joining  with  their  brethren.  It  would  be  impossible  to 
prove  the  unlawfulness  of  such  a  scheme;  or,  until  an  or- 
ganization were  made,  that  the  minor  part  were  bound  to 
submit  to  the  will  of  the  majority.  There  was  no  likeli- 
hood of  such  an  indiscreet  proceeding  in  Connecticut.  But 
in  some  other  departments  which  might  be  named,  it  would 
not  have  been  surprising.  Let  it  be  remarked,  that  in  the 
preceding  hypothesis  there  is  supposed  to  have  been,  in 
the  different  neighborhoods,  a  bond  of  union  not  dissolved 
by  the  revolution.  This  sentiment  is  congenial  with  Chris- 
tianity itself,  and  with  Christian  discipline  in  the  beginning; 
the  connection  not  existing  congregationally,  but,  in  every 
instance,  without  dependence  on  the  houses  in  which  the 
worship  of  the  different  portions  of  the  aggregate  body  may 
be  carried  on. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  Ill 

Section  II.     Of  tJie  Measures  taken  to  obtain  the  Episcopacy. 

The  expression  should  be  noticed,  on  account  of  the 
pretence  made  by  some,  that  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  begun  with  its  obtaining  of  the  Episcopacy. 
According  to  this  notion,  where  dioceses  exist  independ- 
ently on  one  another,  as  was  the  condition  of  all  Christen- 
dom for  a  long  time  after  the  preaching  of  the  apostles,  on 
the  decease  of  every  bishop,  his  church  became  extinct.  A 
new  name  does  ftot  characterize  the  church  as  new,  but 
may  arise  from  civil  changes,  in  various  ways  to  be  con- 
ceived of.  What  was  called  formerly  "the  Church  of  Eng- 
land in  America,"  did  not  cease  to  exist  on  the  removal  of 
the  Episcopacy  of  the  Bishop  of  London,  by  the  Provi- 
dence of  God,  but  assumed  a  new  name,  as  the  dictate  of 
propriety. 

It  maybe  matter  of  surprise,  that,  after  the  clamor  made 
but  a  few  years  before  this  period,  on  the  proposal  of  an 
American  Episcopacy,  and  considering  the  fashion  of  ob- 
jecting to  it  prevailing  even  among  a  considerable  propor- 
tion of  our  own  communion,  there  should  now  be  a  unani- 
mous application  for  it,  from  a  fair  representation  of  the 
Church  in  seven  states  of  the  Union;  the  lay  part  consist- 
ing principally  of  gentlemen  who  had  been  active  in  the 
late  revolution,  and  made  under  circumstances  which  re- 
quired the  consent  of  the  very  power  we  had  been  at  war 
with.*  The  truth  is,  that  if  there  existed  any  inclination 
to  object — and  there  is  no  certainty  of  the  contrary — it  was 
prevented  by  what  is  to  be  related. 

A  few  months  before  the  present  period,  Bishop  Seabury 
had  arrived  in  Connecticut,  with  consecration  from  the 
non-juring  bishops  of  Scotland.  The  clergy  in  that  state, 


*  In  evidence  of  the  unanimity,  there  is  in  possession  of  the  author,  the  original 
instrument,  signed  by  all  the  clerical  and  all  the  lay  members  who  gave  attend- 
ance on  the  business  of  the  convention. 


112  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

not  liking  the  complexion  of  the  measures  taken  for  the 
calling  of  a  General  Convention,  wrote  to  several  of  the 
southern  clergy,  inviting  {hem  to  a  convention  to  be  held 
in  the  summer  at  New  Haven.*  What  answer  they  received 
from  others  is  not  here  known,  but  that  of  Philadelphia 
thanked  them  for  the  invitation,  congratulated  Bishop  Sea- 
bury  on  his  arrival,  apologized  for  the  not  coming,  by  the 
expectation  of  the  convention  in  September,  and  invited 
the  clergy  of  Connecticut  to  attend  the  latter. 

When  the  time  of  the  convention  in  Philadelphia  drew 
near,  Bishop  Seabury  wrote  to  Dr.  Smith,  then  living  in 
Maryland,  a  letter,  which  he  enclosed,  under  cover,  to  Dr. 
Chandler,  of  Elizabethtown,  who  sent  it,  in  like  manner, 
to  the  author,  desiring  him  to  read,  and  then  forward  it  to 
Dr.  Smith.  In  this  letter,  a  copy  of  which  the  author  has 
now  before  him,  Bishop  Seabury,  besides  objecting  to  sun- 
dry of  the  measures  taken  in  the  southern  states,  declared 

/himself  in  very  strong  terms  against  the  admission  of  the 
laity  into  ecclesiastical  councils;  and  indeed  against  that  of 

•  presbyters  also,  except  into  the  diocesan.  For  although 
his  expressions  are,  that  they  were  not  admitted  into  gen- 
eral councils,  and  this  is  very  indefinite,  yet  it  would  seem 
from  the  connection,  that  he  disapproved  of  submitting  the 

'  general  concerns  of  the  American  Church   to   any  other 
than    bishops.     It    is   the   arrangement    of  the   Church   in 
'  which  Bishop  Seabury  received  his  Episcopacy. 

This  letter,  which,  agreeably  to  a  desire  expressed  in  it, 
was  laid  before  the  convention,  produced  some  animadver- 
sions. A  few  of  the  lay  gentlemen  spoke  more  warmly 
than  the  occasion  seemed  to  justify,  considering,  that  the 
letter  appeared  to  contain  the  honest  sentiments  of  the 
writer,  delivered  in  inoffensive  terms.  It  was  addressed  to 


•  According  to  learning,  the  first  Convocation  in  Connecticut  was  to  meet  at 
I  Middletown,  Aug.  3d,  1785.  The  body  was  adjourned  to  meet  in  New  Haven, 
!  Sept.  I  ith  of  the  same  year.  See  Journals  III.,  69,  and  Appendix,  No.  4.  Bishop 
\  White  was  informed  of  both  meetings.  Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  113 

a  gentleman  who  had  long  lived  in  habits  of  acquaintance 
with  the  writer.  And  as  for  its  being  designed  for  the 
hearing  of  the  body  then  assembled,  it  should  have  been 
remembered,  that  the  clergy  of  Connecticut  had  been  in- 
vited to  the  meeting,  by  those  at  whose  desire  they  had 
appeared  themselves.  On  this  ground,  they  were  answered 
by  some  of  the  clergy — particularly  by  Dr.  Andrews. 

For  the  letter,  see  Appendix,  No.  4. 

It  naturally  happened  in  regard  to  any  apprehensions 
entertained  of  an  excessive  hierarchy,  that  they  influenced 
to  the  very  application  to  England,  which  had  formerly, 
from  the  very  same  cause,  been  contemplated  with  jeal- 
ousy. It  was  generally  understood,  that  the  door  was 
open  to  consecration  in  Scotland;  or  at  least,  that  if  there 
should  be  any  impediment,  it  must  arise  from  some  particu- 
lars, which  had  been  thought  too  republican  by  many. 
That  the  clergy  unanimously,  and  that  a  very  great  body 
of  the  laity,  would  adhere  to  Episcopacy,  was  well  known; 
and  therefore,  how  natural  the  recourse  to  a  quarter  in 
which  it  was  thought  there  would  be  less  stiffness,  on  the 
points  objected  to  by  Bishop  Seabury !  it  may  be  added— in 
which  the  political  principles  obtaining,  although  monarch- 
ical, were  not  such  as  favored  arbitrary  power.  It  ought 
to  be  understood,  that  this  is  the  supposed  strain  of  rea- 
soning of  a  few  only.  The  majority  of  the  convention  cer- 
tainly thought  it  a  matter  of  choice,  and  even  required  by 
decency,  to  apply,  in  the  first  instance,  to  the  Church  of 
which  the  American  had  been  till  now  a  part.  No  doubt,] 
the  sentiment  was  strengthened  by  the  general  disappro-' 
bation  entertained  in  America  of  the  prejudices  which,  in 
-the  year  1688,  in  Scotland,  had  deprived  the  Episcopal] 
Church  of  her  establishment,  and  had  kept  her  ever  since 
in  hostility  to  the  family  on  the  throne.  As  to  Bishop  Sea-- 
bury's  failure  in  England,  the  causes  'of  it,  as  stated  in  his 
letter,  seemed  to  point  out  a  way  of  obviating  the  difficulty 
in  the  present  case.  The  same  causes  had  been,  with  no 
considerable  variety,  stated  to  the  author  in  a  letter  from 


114  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  Rev.  Dr.  Murray,  formerly  of  Reading  in  this  state, 
who  declared  his  full  conviction,  that  a  proper  application, 
from  such  a  body  as  was  in  contemplation,  that  is,  the 
present  convention,  of  whose  intended  meeting  he  had 
been  informed,  would  be  followed  by  success.  As  the  doc- 
tor was  supposed  to  have  conversed  with  leading  charac- 
ters on  the  subject,  which  was  found  afterward  to  have 
been  the  case,  his  letter  had  great  weight  in  encouraging 
the  measure. 

So  it  was,  then,  that  the  projected  application  found  no 
opposition.  The  duty  of  proposing  a  mode  of  application  } 
was  added  to  the  other  duties  of  the  general  committee  i 
which  had  been  appointed.  As  one  of  a  sub-committee, 
the  author  drafted  the  resolves  and  the  address,  as  they 
stand  on  the  journals,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  verbal 
alterations.  Thus  a  foundation  was  laid  for  the  procuring 
of  the  present  Episcopacy.  It  was  a  prudent  provision  of 
the  convention,  to  instruct  the  deputies  from  the  respective 
states,  to  apply  to  the  civil  authorities  existing  in  them 
respectively,  for  their  sanction  of  the  measure,  in  order  to 
avoid  one  of  the  impediments  which  had  stood  in  the  way 
of  Bishop  Seabury.  The  address  above  alluded  to,  which 
was  the  first  step  in  the  correspondence  with  the  English 
prelates,  is  in  the  Appendix,  No.  5. 

The  Episcopalian  public  may  be  supposed  to  be  satisfied 
that  the  course  taken  was  the  best,  in  every  point  of  view, 
and  that  it  can  never  suffer  by  a  comparison  with  any  other 
mode  which   might    have   been    pursued.     To  have  aban-\ 
doned  the  Episcopal  succession,  would  have  been  in  oppo-  \ 
sition  to  primitive  order  and  ancient  habits;  and  besides, J 
would  at  least  have  divided    the    Church.     To   have  had 
recourse  to  Scotland,  independently  on  the  objections  en- 
tertained against  th  r  political  principles  of  the  non-jurors  i 
of  that  country,  would  not  have  been  proper,  without  pre- 
vious disappointment   on   a  request    made  to  the   mother 
Church.     Another  resource  remained,  in  foreign  ordination; 
which  had  been  made  the  easier  by  the  act  of  the  British 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  115 

parliament,  passed  in  the  preceding  year,  to  enable  the 
Bishop  of  London  to  ordain  citizens  or  subjects  of  foreign 
countries  without  exacting  the  usual  oaths.  But,  besides 
that  this  would  have  kept  the  Church  under  the  same 
hardships  which  had  heretofore  existed,  and  had  been  so 
long  complained  of;  dependence  on  a  foreign  country  in 
spirituals,  when  there  had  taken  place  independence  in  tem- 
porals, is  what  no  prudent  person  would  have  pleaded  for. 

Section   III.     Of  the  Alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common 

Prayer. 

When  the  members  of  the  convention  first  came  to- 
gether,  very  few,  or  rather,  it  is  believed,  none  of  them 
entertained  thoughts  of  altering  the  Liturgy,  any  further 
than  to  accommodate  it  to  the  revolution.  There  being  no 
express  authority  to  the  purpose,  the  contrary  was  implied 

^•-  "  ""  •  *     *  A  J.  •••     '  '  * -        •*•  L 

in  the  sending  of  deputies,  on  the  ground  of  the  recom- 
mendation and  proposal  from  New  York,  \vhich  presumed 
that  the  book,  with  the  aboyje  exception,  should  remain 
entire.     The  only  Church  to  which  this  remark  does  not 
apply,  is  that  of  Virginia;  which  authorized  its  deputies  to 
join  in  a  review,  liable  however  to  a  rejection  by  their  own 
convention.     Every  one,  so  far  as  is  here  known,  wished 
for  alterations  in  the  different  offices.     But  it  was  thought,  . 
at   New  "York,   in  the  preceding   year,   that   such  an  en-  '> 
terprise  could  not  be  undertaken,  until  the  Church  should  ' 
be   consolidated   and   organized.     Perhaps   it   would   have 
been  better,  if  the  same  opinion  had  been  continued  and 
acted  on. 

But  it  happened  otherwise.  Some  of  the  members  hesi- 
tated at  making  the  book  so  permanent  as  it  would  have 
been  by  the  fourth  article  of  the  recommendatory  instru- 
ment. Arguments  were  held  in  favor  of  a  review,  from 
cha_nge  of  language,  and  from  the  notorious  fact,  that  there 
were  some  matters  universally  held  exceptionable,  inde- 
pendently on  doctrine.  A  moderate  review,  fell  in  with 


Il6  AfEAfOIKS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

I  the  sentiments  and  the  wishes  of  every  member.     Added  to    ! 
all  this,  there  gained  ground  a  confident  persuasion,  that 
the  general  mind  of  the  communion  would  be  so  gratified 
by  it,  as  that  acquiescence  might  be  confidently  expected. 
On  these  considerations,  the  matter  was  undertaken. 

The  alterations  were  prepared  by  another  sub-division 
of  the  general  committee  than  that  to  which  the  author  be- 
longed. When  brought  into  the  committee,  they  were  not 
reconsidered;  because  the  ground  would  have  to  be  gone 
over  again  in  the  convention.  Accordingly,  he  can  not 
give  an  account  of  any  arguments  arising  in  the  prepara- 
tory stage  of  the  business.  Even  in  the  convention,  there 
were  but  few  points  canvassed,  with  any  material  difference 
of  principle:  and  those  only  shall  be  noticed. 

The  first  controversy  of  this  description  was  introduced, 
on  a  motion  made  by  the  Hon^Mr.  Page,  of  Virginia,  since 

I  governor  of  that  state,  to  leave  out  the  first  four  petitions 
of  the  Litany,  and,  instead  of  them,  to  introduce  a  short 
petition,   which  he  had  drawn  up,  more  agreeable  to  his 
ideas  of  the  Divine  Persons  recognized  in  those  petitions. 
The  mover  declared,  that  he  had  no  objection  to  the  invok- 
ing of  our  blessed  Saviour,  whose  divinity  the  prayer  ac- 
knowledged, and  Whom  he  considered  as  invoked  through 
the  whole  of  the  Liturgy  which,  he  thought,  might  be  de- 
fended by  Scripture.     The  objection  lay  to  the  word  "  Trin-V 
ity,"  which  he  remarked  to  be  unauthorized  by  Scripture,  1 
and  a  foundation  of  much  unnecessary  disputation.     But  he  / 
said,  that  the  leaving  out  of  the  fourth  petition  only,  in 
which  only  the  word  occurred,  would  leave  the  other  peti- 
tions liable  to  the  charge  of  acknowledging  three  Gods; 
^    and  therefore  he  moved  to  strike  out  the  whole.     The  Rev.j 
f   Dr.  West,  of  Baltimore,  answered  Mr.  Page,  in  a  speech  in\ 
which  the  doctor  appeared  to  be  in  great  agitation,  partly  J 
because,  as  he  said,  he  was  unused  to  unprepared  speaking  ,f 
but  evidently  the  more  so,  from  his  apprehensions  arising\ 
from  what  he  supposed  to  be  the  signal  for  aiming  at  very  ) 
hazardous  and  essential  alterations.     Perhaps  much  morej 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  117 

* 

would  have  been  said,  but  during  Dr.  West's  speech,  it  was 
whispered  about,  that  there  was  really  no  use  in  going  into 
such  a  controversy;  that  Mr.  Page  had  made  the  motion, 
merely  to  preserve  consistency  of  conduct;  that  he  had  at- 
tempted the  same  thing  in  the  sub-committee,  and  well 
knew,  from  what  had  passed,  that  there  was  no  prospect  of 
success,  but  that  he  could  not  dispense  with  the  bringing  of 
the  question  before  the  body.  Accordingly,  as  soon  as  Dr. 
West  had  finished,  it  was  put  and  lost  without  a  division.* 
The  next  material  question,  to  the  best  of  the  recollec- 

i  tion  retained,  was  on  a  motion  for  framing  a  service  for  the 

'  Fourth  of  July.    This  was  the  most  injudicious  step  taken  by' 
the  convention.     Might  they  not  have  foreseen,  that  every 

I  clergyman  whose  political  principles  interfered  with  the 
appointment,  would  be  under  a  strong  temptation  to  cry 
down  the  intended  book,  if  it  were  only  to  get  rid  of  the 

I  offensive  holiday?  Besides  this  point  of  prudence,  was  it 
not  the  dictate  of  moderation,  to  avoid  the  introducing  of 
extraneous  matter  of  difference  of  opinion,  in  a  Church  that 
was  to  be  built  up?  Especially,  when  there  was  in  contem- 
plation  the  moderating  of  religious  tests,  was  it  consistent 
to  introduce  a  political  one  ?  It  was  said,  that  the  revolu- 
tion  being  now  accomplished,  all  the  clergy  ought,  as  good 
citizens,  to  conform  to  it;  and  to  uphold,  as  far  as  their  in- 
fluence extended,  the  civil  system  which  had  been  estab- 
lished. Had  the  question  been  concerning  the  praying  for 
the  prosperity  of  the  commonwealths,  and  for  the  persons 
of  those  who  rule  in  them,  the  argument  would  have  been 
conclusive;  and,  indeed,  this  had  been  done  by  all  the  re- 
maining clergy,  however  disaffected  they  might  have  been, 

*  In  a  controversy  since  moved  in  Boston,  Bishop  Provoost  has  been  named, 
as  having  endeavored  to  accomplish  the  omission  of  the  acknowledgment  of  the 
Trinity.  It  is  not  true;  and  the  error  may  be  supposed  to  have  arisen  from  what 
has  been  related  of  the  effort  of  Mr.  Page.  There  have  been  various  misrepresen- 
tations of  the  matter,  which  have  made  it  the  more  necessary  to  state  the  fact. 

See  on  this  note  by  Bishop  White  Journals  III.,  300,  and  Wilson's  "Memoir 
of  Bishop  White,"  p.  323.  Ed. 


Il8  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

throughout  the  war.  But  the  argument  did  not  apply  to  a 
retrospective  approbation  of  the  origin  of  the  civil  consti- 
tutions, or  rather,  to  a  profession  of  such  approbation,  con- 
trary to  known  fact. 

This  was  one  of  the  few  occasions  on  which  the  author 
used  the  privilege,  reserved  by  him  on  his  acceptance  of  the 
presidency,  to  deliver  his  opinion.  To  his  great  surprise, 
there  was  but  one  gentleman  —  and  he  a  professed  friend  to 
American  independence  —  who  spoke  on  the  same  side  of 
the  question;  and  there  were  very  few,  if  any,  who  voted 
with  the  two  speakers  against  the  measure.  Bodies  of  men 
are  more  apt  than  individuals  to  calculate  on  an  implicit 
submission  'to  their  determinations.  The  present  was  a 
striking  instance  of  the  remark.  The  members  of  the 
convention  seem  to  have  thought  themselves  so  established 
in  their  station  of  ecclesiastical  legislators,  that  they  might 
expect  of  the  many  clergy  who  had  been  averse  to  the 
American  revolution  the  adoption  of  this  service;  although, 
by  the  use  of  it,  they  must  make  an  implied  acknowledg- 
ment of  their  error,  in  an  address  to  Almighty  God.  What  1 
must  further  seem  not  a  little  extraordinary,  the  service  , 
was  principally  arranged  and  the  prayer  alluded  to  was  < 


composed,   by  a   reverend    gentleman    (Dr.    Smith), 
had  written  and  acted  against    the   declaration   of  Inde-  4  * 
pendence,    and   was   unfavorably   looked    on   by   the   sup-   I 
porters    of  it,   during   the  whole   revolutionary  war.     His  '' 
conduct,  in  the  present  particular,  was  different  from  what 
might  have  been  expected  from  his  usual  discernment;  but 
he  doubtless  calculated  on  what  the  good  of  the  Church 
seemed  to  him  to  require,  in  consequence  of  a  change  of 
circumstances;  and  he  was  not  aware  of  the  effect  which 
would  be  produced  by  the  retrospective  property  of  the  ap- 
pointment.    The  greater  stress  is  laid  on  this  matter,  be- 
'i    ..cause  of  the  notorious  fact,  that  the  majority  of  the  clergy  ^ 

)    /'could  not  have  used  the  service,  without  subjecting  them- 
*/tr<rtf  se^ves  to  "dicule  and  censure.     For  the  author's  part,  hav-  • 
•'  ing  no  hindrance  of  this  sort,  he  contented  himself  with 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  119 

having  opposed  the  measure,  and  kept  the  day  from  re- 
spect to  the  requisition  of  the  convention;  but  could  never  r 
hear  of  its  being  kept,  in  above  two  or  three  places  besides  ^ 
<  Philadelphia.     He  is  thus  particular  in  recording  the  inci- 
dents  attached   to   the   matter  stated,  with  the   hope  of 
rendering  it  a  caution  to  ecclesiastical  bodies,  to  avoid  that 
danger  into  which  human  nature  is  so  apt  to  fall,  of  govern- 
ing too  much. 

On  the  subject  of  the  articles,  a  dispute  arose  in  regard 
to  the  article  on  justification;  not  as  it  was  at  last  agreed 
on,  but  as  it  was  proposed  by  the  sub-committee.  The 
o&jection  was  urged  principally  by  the  secretary  of  the 
convention  —  the  Rev.  Dr.  Griffith  —  and  by  the  author. 
The  proposed  article  was  at  last  withdrawn,  and  the  words 
of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  on  that  subject,  were  restored. 
In  this  there  is  certainly  no  superaddition  to  what  is  held 
generally  by  divines*  of  the  Church  of  England.  As  to  the 
substitute  proposed,  the  objection  made  to  it,  was  its  being 
liable  to  a  construction  contrary  to  the  great  evangelical 
truth,  that  salvation  is  of  grace.  It  would  have  been  a 
forced  construction,  but  not  to  be  disregarded.  Some 
wished  to  get  rid  of  the  new  article  introduced  concern- 
ing predestination,  without  stating  any  thing  in  its  place. 
This,  it  is  probable,  would  have  been  better  than  the  pro- 
posed article,  which  professes  to  say  something  on  the 
subject,  yet  in  reality  says  nothing.  But  many  gentlemen 
were  of  opinion,  that  the  subject  was  not  to  be  passed  over 
in  silence  altogether;  and  therefore  consented  to  the  article 
on  predestination,  as  it  stands  on  the  Proposed  Book.  The(..  J  h  /f 
opinion  of  the  author  was,  that  the  article  should  be  ac-//*^,  r> 
commodjated,  not  to  individual  condition,  and  to  everlast-SA***** 
ing  reward  and  punishment,  but  to  national  designation,  v? /x  2  /-  /^ 
and  to  a  state  of  covenant  with  God  in  the  present  life.) 

• —  ~  —  __      . — —  -       —  *  _ — —  _   _»-.-^_      /  t    Ji 

Although  this  is  a  view  of  the  subject  still  entertained  by  ~ 
him,  yet  he  has  been  since  convinced,  that  the  introducing  /  y 
of  it  as  an  article  would  have  endangered  needless  centre-' 
versy   on   the   meanings  of  the  terms  predestination  and 


120  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

election,  as  used  in  the  New  Testament.  If  we  can  not  do 
away  the  ground  of  controversy  heretofore  laid,  it  at  least 
becomes  us  to  avoid  the  furnishing  of  new  matter  for  the 
excitement  of  it.  As  to  the  article  in  the  Proposed  Book, 
although  no  one  professed  scruples  against  what  is  there 
affirmed,  yet  there  seemed  a  difficulty  in  discovering  for 
what  purpose  it  was  introduced.  The  author  never  met 
with  any  who  were  satisfied  with  it. 

On  the  subject  of  original  sin,  an  incident  occurred, 
strongly  marking  the  propensity  already  noticed,  unwarily 
to  make  private  opinion  the  standard  of  public  faith.  The 
sub-commfftee  had  introduced  into  this  article  the  much 
controverted  passage  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  Epistle 
,  to  the  Romans,  beginning  at  the  ninth  verse;  and  they  had 
I  applied  it  as  descriptive  of  the  Christian  state.  The  con- 
struction is  exacted  by  a  theory,  than  which  nothing  was 
further  from  that  of  the  gentleman  (Dr!  Smith)  who  would 
have  bound  this  sense  of  the  passage  on  the  Church.  The 
,  interpretation  generally  given  by  divines  of  the  Church  of 
England,  makes  the  words  descriptive  of  man's  unregencr- 
'  ate  state,  in  which  there  is  a  struggle  between  nature  and 
grace,  to  the  extent  of  the  terms  made  use  of  in  Scripture. 
This  seems  necessary  to  a  conformity  with  the  Christian 
character,  as  drawn  in  innumerable  places.  It  was  on  a 
proposal  of  the  author,  that  the  article  was  altered  in  this 
particular,  although  the  gentleman  who  had  drafted  it  not  / 
only  earnestly  contended  for  his  construction  of  the  text, 
but  could  not  be  made  sensible  of  the  danger  which  would 
have  resulted  from  the  establishing  of  that  construction,  as 
a  test  to  every  candidate  for  Orders. 

Less  prominent  debates  on  the  subject  of  the  articles  are 
not  here  noticed.  Whatever  is  novel  in  them,  was  taken 
from  a  book  in  the  possession  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith.  The 
book  was  anonymous,  and  was  one  of  the  publications 
which  have  abounded  in  England,  projecting  changes  in 
the  established  articles. 

On  this  business  of  the  review  of  the  Book  of  Common 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  121 

Prayer  and  of  the  articles,  the  convention  seem  to  have 
fallen  into  two  capital  errors,  independently  on  the  merits 
of  the  alterations  themselves.     The  first  error  was  the  or-     • 
dering  of  the  printing  of  a  large  edition  of  the  book,  which    ( 
did  not  well  consist  with  the  principle  of  mere  proposal. 
Perhaps  much  of  the  opposition  to  it  arose  from  this  very 
thing,  which  seemed  a  stretch  of  power,  designed  to  effect    / 
the  introduction  of  the  book  to  actual  use,  in  order  to  pre- 
vent a  discussion  of  its  merits.     The  other  error  was  the    • 
ordering  of  the  use  of  it  in  Christ  Church,  Philadelphia,  on 
the  occasion  of  Dr.  Smith's  sermon,  at  the  conclusion  of     • 
the  session  of  the  convention.     This  helped  to  confirm  the 
opinion  of  its  being  to  be  introduced  with  a  high  hand, 
and  subjected  the  clergy  of  Philadelphia  to  extraordinary 
difficulty;  for  they  continued  the  use  of  the  liturgy,  agree- 
ably to  the  alterations,  on  assurances  given  by  many  gentle- 
men, that  they  would  begin  it  in  their  respective  churches 
immediately  on  their  return.     This  the  greater  number  of  (( 
them  never  did,  and  there  are  known  instances  in  each  of  ' 
which  the  stipulation  was  shrunk  back  from,  because  some 
influential  member  of  a  congregation  was  dissatisfied  with 
some  one  of  the  alterations.     This  is  a  fact  which  shows 
very  strongly  how  much  weight  of  character  is  necessary 
to  such  changes  as  may  be  thought  questionable.* 

Section    IV.     Of  sundry   Measures   and  Events,   connected 
with  the  Acts  of  the  Convention  of  1785. 

The  first  particular  claiming  attention  under  this  head, 
is  the  publication  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  that  is, 
of  the  edition  which  has  received  the  name  of  the  Proposed 
Book. 


*  The  Proposed  Book  was  doomed  from  the  outset,  and  the  volume  is  now  very 
scarce.  It  was  reprinted  in  London  in  1789;  and  afterwards  at  Bath  in  Hall's 
"  Reliquiae  Liturgicae,"  Vol.  V.;  while  an  incomplete  issue  appeared  in  New  York 
in  1873.  See  also  "Quarterly  Church  Review,"  Vol.  XI.,  p.  302.  On  the  opposi- 
tion to  Proposed  Book  see  Journals  III.,  p.  297.  Ed. 


122  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


Dr.  Smith,  Dr.  Wharton,  ana  the  author,  who  were  ap- 

pointed to  this  service,  gave  their  application  to  it  without 

,  delay.     But   here,  unexpected  difficulties  occurred,  which 

)  are  taken  notice  of,  principally  with  the  view  of  guarding 

v    against  the  like  in  future  ecclesiastical  proceedings. 

The  committee  had  been  authorized  to  make  verbal  al- 
terations, but  were  restrained  from  departing,  either  in 
form  or  in  substance,  from  what  had  been  agreed  on.  Set- 
ting aside  the  questions  arising  on  this  distmction,  the  im- 
perfections evidently  remaining  on  some  points  by  reason 
of  haste,  and  which  would  have  been  remedied  had  they 
been  attended  to,  and,  added  to  this,  the  importunities  of 
some  of  the  clergy,  who  pressed  the  committee  to  extend 
their  powers  pretty  far,  in  full  confidence  that  the  liberty 
would  be  acceptable  to  all,  were  such,  that,  in  the  end, 
(  they  were  drawn  on  to  take  a  greater  latitude  than  ought 
to  be  allowed  in  such  a  work. 

Besides  discretion  as  to  verbal  alterations,  the  commit- 
tee were  fully  empowered  on  the  subject  of  the  tables,  and 
on  that  of  the  selection  of  reading  psalms.  The  author's 
proposal  was  to  take  whole  psalms,  selecting  such  as  fall  in 
with  the  general  subjects  of  divine  worship,  and  leaving 
the  officiating  minister  to  his  choice,  among  those  which 
should  be  selected.  But  the  other  members  of  the  com- 
mittee were  of  opinion,  that  as  much  should  be  retained  as 
could  not  well  be  objected  to,  on  the  score  of  being  unsuit- 
able parts  of  Christian  prayer  and  praise.  The  consequence 
of  this,  was  a  charge  of  having  treated  Scripture  irrever- 
ently, by  the  leaving  out  of  particular  passages,  on  the 
principle  of  their  being  offensive.  Although  the  omissions 
were  not  made  on  that  ground,  because  it  is  not  every  part 
of  Scripture  that  can  be  introduced  into  the  exercise  of 
devotion,  yet  there  would  apparently  have  been  less  color 
for  the  censure,  on  the  other  plan  of  the  selection  of  entire 
psalms.  The  author  has  been  since  convinced,  that  instead'' 
of  a  selection  of  psalms  in  any  shape,  a  better  way  would  j 
have  been  to  print  the  Psalter  entire,  and  to  leave  every  j 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  123 

officiating  minister  to  his  choice,  from  time  to  time.  This 
would  have  less  interfered  with  the  ideas  of  those  who,  on 
account  of  the  sublime  spirit  of  devotion  running  through 
the  whole  body  of  the  Psalms,  were  averse  to  the  parting 
with  any  proportion  of  them  from  the  service  of  the  Church. 
For  although,  according  to  the'  idea  here  suggested,  it 
would  have  been  impossible  to  have  gratified  every  individ- 
ual under  the  proposed  alternative,  yet  there  might  have 
been  taken  which  ever  side  of  it  was  the  most  likely  to  be 
satisfactory. 

It  has  been  painful  to  the  author,  that  he  has  found  him- 
self opposed  in  opinion  to  that  of  some  of  his  brethren, 
whose  views  of  the  subject  have  the  appearance  of  being 
opened  to  them  by  the  sentiment  of  devotion.  Yet,  he  can 
not  perceive  the  propriety  of  putting  into  the  mouths  of  a 
whole  congregation  devotions  expressive  of  peculiar  states 
of  mind,  and  such  as  are  not  likely  to  be  applicable  to 
many  persons  in  an  ordinary  assembly;  for  instance,  strains, 
expressive  of  the  highest  exultation,  and  other  strains,  ex- 
pressive of  the  lowest  depths  of  sorrow.  He  is  aware  of 
what  is  argued  in  favor  of  this,  from  the  sentiment  of  Chris- 
tian sympathy,  by  which  every  member  of  a  Church  may 
enter  into  feelings  which  are  otherwise  not  his  own,  but 
which  he  may  reasonably  suppose  to  belong  to  some  who 
are  fellow-members  of  the  body.  The  author  respects  the 
plea,  but  can  not  bring  it  within  the  sphere  of  his  own 
ideas  of  the  precept,  to  "pray  with  the  understanding." 
He  has  heard  of  another  argument  for  the  practice.  It  is 
the  use  of  impressing  the  whole  of  those  excellent  compo- 
sitions on  the  memories  of  all  the  members  of  the  Church. 
But  on  this  plan  it  would  seem,  that  Scripture  would  be 
honored  still  more,  if,  from  Genesis  to  Revelation,  it  were 
embodied  with  the  service.  This,  however,  could  not  have 
been  the  object  of  the  introduction  of  the  Psalms.  There 
have  been  urged  testimonies  from  the  Fathers,  demonstra- 
tive of  the  great  use  of  these  compositions  in  the  early  ages 
of  the  Church,  and  its  not  being  recorded  of  any  particular 


124  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

psalms,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  rest.  No:  the  whole  body 
of  them  may  have  been  a  fund  of  devotion,  consistently 
with  choice  made,  as  subject  and  as  circumstances  might 
dictate.  He  has  not  yet  found  evidence,  that  in  the  primi-  ^ 
tivc  Church,  as  in  the  Church  of  England,  the  book  was 
gone  through  in  a  routine  of  successive  portions.  Al- 
though these  are  his  opinions,  yet  he  laments  the  extent 
of  the  innovation,  made  at  the  period  referred  to,  because 
he  believes  that  the  aiming  at  so  much,  prevented  what 
might  have  been  done  more  effectually,  and  brought  into 
universal  use,  by  allowance  of  the  discretion  which  has 
been  pleaded  for. 

Under  the  foregoing  head,  there  has  been  noticed  what 
is  here  thought  a  great  error  in  the  convention — the  print- 
ing of  the  book,  without  waiting  for  the  reception  of  the 
alterations,  and  their  being  in  use.  A  subordinate  error, 
accompanying  the  other,  was  the  endeavoring  to  raise  a 
profit  from  the  book,  although  for  a  charitable  purpose.  It 
had  two  bad  consequences;  that  of  exciting  the  supposition 
that  the  books  were  made  the  dearer — although,  in  reality, 
this  was  not  the  fact,  and  that  of  inducing  the  committee 
to  send  them  to  the  clergy,  in  the  different  parts  of  the 
continent,  confiding  in  their  exertions  for  the  benevolent  . 
purpose  declared.  Several  of  the  clergy  again  intrusted 
them  to  persons  from  whom  they  got  no  returns.  Hence 
it  happened,  that  when  the  expenses  of  the  edition  were 
paid,  there  was  not  so  much  left  for  the  charity,  as  to  be 
j  an  adequate  consideration  for  such  an  undertaking.  The 
!  committee  were  at  last  obliged  to  relinquish  the  design  of 
1  saving  for  the  charity  the  usual  profit  of  the  booksellers, 
who,  on  that  change  of  plan,  made  rapid  sales  of  them. 

Another  bad  effect  of  the  publication  was,  that  the 
English  prelates  were  not  furnished  with  an  account  of  the 
alterations  so  soon  as  they  should  have  been,  considering 
the  application  that  had  come  before  them.  For  the  com- 
mittee, having  had  good  reason  to  believe  that  the  impres- 
sion would  go  on  rapidly,  had  not  furnished  a  copy  of  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  125 

instrument  containing  the  alterations.  Their  waiting  first 
for  paper  from  the  mills,  and  then,  for  one  interfering  ob- 
ject and  another  occurring  to  the  printer,  brought  it  to 
spring  before  the  edition  was  out.  It  is  true,  that  the 
sheets  were  sent  by  parcels  during  the  progress.  None 
however  arrived  before  the  answer  to  the  address  was  sent; 
and  this  inattention — or  what  seemed  such — the  bishops 
could  not  account  for,  as  the  archbishop  afterward  dis- 
tantly intimated  to  those  who  received  consecration  in 
England.  Hence  arose  the  caution  with  which  the  con- 
vention were  answered  by  the  right  reverend  bench:  a 
caution  evidently  to  be  discerned,  in  their  letter  of  the 
24th  of  February,  1786.  For  some  of  the  clergy  in  the 
eastern  states,  from  what  is  here  supposed  to  have  been 
mistaken  zeal,  had  been  very  early,  in  conveying  to  their 
clerical  acquaintance  in  England,  an  unfavorable  represen- 
tation of  the  spirit  of  the  proceedings;  a  fact  which  is 
glanced  at  in  the  same  letter.  Although  the  impression 
thus  produced  was  so  far  done  away  on  the  arrival  of  the 
book,  as  that  there  remained  no  radical  impediment  to  the 
gratification  of  the  Church,  in  granting  her  request  made, 
which  must  be  evident  to  every  one  who  reads  their  subse- 
quent letter;  yet  it  follows  from  this  narrative,  that  their 
misapprehension  would  have  been  obviated,  if  the  printing 
had  been  confined  to  the  list  of  the  proposed  alterations. 

For  the  letter  of  the  English  prelates,  see  Appendix, 
No.  6. 

From  the  letter  of  their  lordships  it  appears,  that  the 
omission  of  the  article  of  Christ's  Descent  into  Hell,  in  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  was  the  thing  principally  faulted.  It  was 
the  objection  made  by  Dr.  Moss,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells, 
that  swayed  in  this  matter.  A  gentleman  who  had  been  a 
member  of  the  convention — Richard  Peters,  Esq. — happen- 
ing to  visit  England  a  few  months  after,  and  having  waited 
on  the  archbishop  at  the  request  of  the  committee,  the  said 
bishop  expressed  a  wish  to  see  him,  and,  in  the  consequent 
interview,  declared  very  strongly  his  disapprobation  of  that 


126  MEMOfRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

alteration.  It  was  learned  afterward  in  England,  from  Dr. 
Watson,  Bishop  of  Landaff,  that  the  objection  came  princi- 
pally from  the  quarter  here  noticed.  Indeed  he  expressed 
himself  in  such  a  manner,  as  led  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  only  was  the  objector.  No 
doubt  the  bishops  generally  must  have  approved  of  the  ob- 
jection, considering  their  concurring  in  the  strong  protest 
that  came  from  them,  on  the  subject  of  the  omitted  article. 
However,  from  the  different  particulars  attending  the  trans- 
action, the  author  is  disposed  to  believe,  that,  had  it  not 
been  for  the  above-mentioned  circumstance,  they  would 
hardly  have  started  their  objection  to  the  omission  in  such 
a  manner  as  carries  the  appearance  of  their  making  of  a 

*  restoration  of  the  clause  a  condition  of  their  compliance 
'^with  the  request.  As  to  the  Bishop  of  Landaff,  he  plainly 
said,  speaking  on  the  merits  of  the  subject,  that  he  knew 
not  of  any  scriptural  authority  of  the  article,  unless  it  were 
the  passage  in  St.  Peter  (meaning  I.  iii.  19,  20).  And  this 
he  said  must  be  acknowledged  a  passage  considerably  in- 
volved in  obscurity.  To  the  two  bishops  who  went  for  con- 
secration it  was  very  evident,  that  the  Bishop  of  Landaff 
was  far  from  being  attached  to  the  objection  in  which  he 
had  concurred.  It  is  probable,  that  the  same  may  have 
been  true  of  many  others  of  the  bench.  But  when  the 
matter  was  pressed  by  a  very  venerable  bishop,  eminent 
as  well  for  his  theological  learning  as  for  an  exemplary  life 
and  conversation,  and  rested  by  him  on  the  ground  of  the 

)  contradiction  of  an  ancient  heresy,*  it  must  have  been 
difficult  in  the  body  to  waive  the  objection,  considering  the 
novel  line  in  which  they  were  acting,  and  their  inability, 
in  a  corporate  capacity,  to  act  at  all. 


•  The  heresy  of  Apollinaris  (Bishop  of  Laodicea,  362-382)  who  maintained 
that  the  Logos  held  in  Christ  the  place  of  a  rational  soul,  and  that  God  was  united 
in  Him  with  the  human  body  and  the  sensitive  soul.  Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  127 

Section   V.     Of  Proceedings  of  Conventions  in  the  States 
subsequent  to  those  of  the  General  Convention. 

For  a  while  there  was  felt  the  evil  of  the  mistake  made 
in  the  beginning,  of  not  forwarding  copies  of  the  alterations: 
a  mistake,  less  to  be  imputed  to  the  committee  than  to 
the  convention,  who  had  given  no  order  on  the  subject;  / 
but  who,  perhaps,  presumed  on  the  editing  of  the  book,          . 
before  the  other  conventions  could  be  held.     They  were,/1  J, 
held  in  the  months  of  May  and  June,  1786;  very  soon  after 
the  arrival  of  the  letter  of  the  bishops.     In  New  York  the 
question  of  ratifying  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  kept      A  U  , 
under  consideration.     In  New  Jersey  they  rejected  it,  ex-  ' 
pressing  at  the  same  time  their  approbation  of  the  other  \' 
proceedings  of  the  convention,  except  of  the  constitution.  »V*»^ 
In  Pennsylvania  some  amendments  were  proposed.     The 
same  was  done  in  Maryland.     No  convention  met  in  Dela- 
ware.    In  Virginia  it  was  adapted,  with  the  exception  of 
one  of  the  rubrics,  and  with  some  proposed  amendments  of 
the  articles;  many  dissenting  from  such  adoption,  not,  as 
the  author  was  well  informed,  because  of  the  alterations  ' 
made,  but  because  they  were  so  few.     It  is  strange  to  tell,    \ ,    _  £^ 
\that  the  rubric,  held  to  be  intolerable  in  Virginia,  was  that  f 
\allowingtheministertorepel  an  evil  liver  from  the  com-? 
(munion.     The  author,  some  time  after,  held  serious  argu-    fy.  e^Ji 
ment  on  the  point  with  a  gentleman  who  had  been  influ- 
ential in  the  state  convention.     The  offensive  matter  was  /vTx,.  ?t* 
not  the  precise  provisions  of  the  rubric,   but   that   there  \ 
should  be  any  provision  of  the  kind  or  power  exercised  to  ; 
the  end  contemplated.     In  South  Carolina  the  book  was    $.C,6^ 
received  without  limitation.     On  the  whole,  it  was  evident  c^/^j 
that,  in  regard  to  the  Liturgy,  the  labors  of  the  convention     ^ 
had  not  reached  their  object.     It  did  not  appear  that  the 
constitution  was  objected  to  in  any  state,  except  in  that  of 
New  Jersey.     The  propriety  of  the  application  to  the  Eng- 
lish  bishops   was  not    contradicted    anywhere,    except   in 
South  Carolina:  and  even  in  this  state  there  was  carried  an 


128  •    MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

acquiescence  in  it.  Under  the  circumstances  stated,  the 
convention  to  be  held  in  June,  1786,  was  looked  forward 
to  as  what  would  either  remedy  the  difficulty  or  increase  it. 

There  has  been  given  an  account  of  the  proceedings 
of  sundry  conventions  in  the  different  states,  prior  to  the  • 
meeting  in  New  Brunswick,  in  May,  1784.  At  that  period 
no  convention  had  assembled  in  Virginia.  But  in  May, 
1785,  there  was  one  in  the  City  of  Richmond;  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  which  there  shall  be  here  given  a  general 
account;  for  the  same  reason  as  in  reference  to  the  pro- 
ceedings for  the  organization  of  the  other  churches  com- 
prehended within  the  union. 

There  had  been  previously  passed,  in  the  year  1784,  an 
act  of  the  legislature,  incorporating  the  Episcopal  Church 
in    the   respective   parishes   individually,    and    as    existing 
throughout   the  state;   that   is,   not    only  in    each   parish, 
the  mi/iister  and  vestrymen  chosen  by  the  members  of  the 
church  were  a  body  corporate  for  their  own  appropriate 
church  and  glebe;    but   the  act  recognized   a  convention  S 
consisting  of  the  settled  ministers  and  deputies  from  the/ 
different  vestries,  competent  to  self  government.     In  this ' 
act,  there  was  no  vestige  of  the  former  establishment:  on 
the  contrary,  it  contained  provisos,   guarding  against  all 
claims  tending  to  that   point.     Nevertheless,  the  current 
set  so  strong  against  the  Episcopal  Church,  from  the  en- 
mity of  numerous  professors  of  religion,  not  a  little  aided 
by  opinions  inimical  equally  to  the  Church  and  to  the  soci- 
eties dissenting  from  her,  that  in  the  year  1786,  the  Taw  | 
was  repealed,  with  a  proviso  saving  to  all  religious  soci-    ) 
eties  the  estates  belonging  to  them  respectively.     In  the 
year   1798,  this  statute  also  was  repealed,  as  inconsistent 
with  religious  freedom.* 

•  A  law,  substantially  the  same  as  that  of  1784,  so«far  as  it  incorporated  the 
Church  throughout  the  state,  was  passed  by  the  legislature  of  Maryland  in  the 
year  1802,  in  favor  of  the  Roman  Catholics :  which  does  not  appear  to  have  given 
offence,  or  to  have  been  productive  of  bad  effects;  although  the  like  favor  has  been 
refused  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  same,  state.  ~  , 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  129 

In  this  convention,  the  recommendations  passed  in  New 
YorkTTnT^ctober  of  the  preceding  year,  were  adopted, 
with  two  exceptions.  They  refused  the  acceptance  of  the 
fourth,  concerning  the  liturgy,  until  it  should  be  revised  at  / 

— — — — — ~._ — -j — —  v    n  Qstfjr  i 

the  expected  meeting  in  Philadelphia;  and  in  respect   to  '  i     ,i 
the  sixth  article  determining  the  manner  of  voting,  they 
objected  to  it  as  a  fundamental  article  of  the  constitution; 
but  acquiesced  in  it  as  regarded  the  ensuing  convention,  re- 
serving a  right  to  approve  or  disapprove  of  its  proceedings. 

Their  opinions,  as  to  the  principles  which  should  govern 
in  the  proceedings,  were  detailed  in  instruction  to  deputies 
appointed  by  them  to  the  General  Convention,  and  are  as 
follows: — 

"Gentlemen,  during  your  representation  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church,  we  commend  to  your  observance 
the  following  sentiments  concerning  doctrine  and  worship. 
We  refer  you,  at  the  same  time,  for  these  and  other  objects 
of  your  mission,  to  our  resolutions  on  the  proceedings  of 
the  late  convention  in  New  York. 

"Uniformity  in  doctrine  and  worship  will  unquestion-'  * 
ably  contribute  to  the  prosperity  of  the  Protestant  Epis-  / 
copal  Church.     But  we  earnestly  wish  that  this  may  be  "^r 
pursued   with   liberality   and    moderation.     The    obstacles'" 
which  stand  in  the  way  of  union  among  Christian  societies, 
are  too  often  founded  on  matters  of  mere  form.     They  are 
surmountable,  therefore,  by  those  who,  breathing  the  spirit 
of  Christianity,  earnestly  labor  in  this  pious  work. 

"From  the  Holy  Scriptures  themselves,  rather  than  the 
comments  of  men,  must  we  learn  the  terms  of  salvation. 
Creeds  therefore  ought  to  be  simple:  and  we  are  not  anx-   « 
ious  to  retain  any  other   than   that   which   is   commonly  ' 
called  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

"Should  a  change  in  the  liturgy  be  proposed,  let  it  be  1 
made  with  caution:  and  in  that  case,  let  the  alterations  be 
few,*  and  the  style  of  prayer  continue  as  agreeable  as  may  • 

*  The  original  edition  reads  free,  but  it  is  marked  as  an  error.     Ed. 


130  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

be  to  the  essential  characteristics  of  our  persuasion.  We 
will  not  now  decide,  what  ceremonies  ought  to  be  retained. 
We  wish,  however,  that  those  which  exist  may  be  estimated 
according  to  their  utility;  and  that  such  as  may  appear  fit  to 
be  laid  aside,  may  no  longer  be  appendages  of  our  Church. 

"  We  need  only  add,  that  we  shall  expect  a  report  of 
your  proceedings,  to  be  made  to  those  whom  we  shall  vest 
with  authority  to  call  a  convention." 

The  intercourse  with  the  court  of  Denmark,  noticed  in 
the  proceedings  of  Pennsylvania,  having  been  communi- 
cated by  the  governor  of  Virginia  to  the  body  now  assem- 
bled, their  deputies  were  instructed  to  lay  the  same  before 
the  General  Convention. 

This  convention  of  Virginia  issued  an  address  to  the 
members  of  the  Episcopal  Church  throughout  the  state,  in 
order  to  excite  a  zeal  for  the  reviving  of  the  communion. 

They  passed  rules,  forty-three  in  number,  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church  in  Virginia,  extending  to  a  great 
variety  of  particulars.     In  these  rules  they  made  direct  pro-  C     i 
vision  for  the  trial  of  bishops  and  other  clergymen  bythe  < 
convention:  the  matter  concerning  which  there  hasDteen 
so  much  dissatisfaction,  because  of  its  not  being  directly 
provided  against  by  the  General  Convention  held  within  a 
few  months  after  this  convention  held  in  Richmond. 


G.     Page  26.     Of  the  Convention  in  Philadelphia  and  Wil- 
mington, in  1786. 

The  Rev.  David  Griffith,  D.D.,  rector  of  Fairfax  parish, 
Alexandria,  Virginia,  who  had  been  elected  to  the  Episco- 
pacy in  that  state,  presided  in  this  convention.  Francis 
Hopkinson,  Esq.,  was  the  secretary.  The  convention  was 
opened  with  a  sermon  by  the  president  of  the  preceding 
convention.* 


•  This  sermon  by  Bishop  White,  from  Ps.  xlv.  14,  was  published  by  Hall  and 
Sellers,  in  1786,  and  reprinted  in  1880.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  131 

The  convention  assembled   under  circumstances  which 
bore  strong  appearances  of  a  dissolution  of  the  union  in 
this  early  stage  of  it.*     The  interfering  instructions  from  \ 
the   churches  in  the  different   states — the  embarrassment  ( 
that  had  arisen  from  the  rejection  of  the  Proposed  Book  in 
some  of  the  states  and  the  use  of  it  in  others — some  dis-  ( 
satisfaction  on  account  of  the  Scottish  Episcopacy — and,  \ 
added  to  these,  the  demur  expressed  IrTTrTe Tetter  from  the 
English  bishops,   were  what  the  most  sanguine  contem- 
plated with  apprehension,   and  were  sure   prognostics   of 
our  falling  to  pieces,  in  the  opinion  of  some,  who  were 
dissatisfied  with  the  course  that  had  been  taken  for  the 
organizing   of  the   Church.     How   those   difficulties   were 
surmounted  will  be  seen. 

In  regard  to  the  interfering  instructions,  they  were  all 
silenced  by  the  motion  that  stands  on  the  journal,  for  refer- 
ring them  to  the  first  convention,  which  should  meet  fully   j 
authorized  to  determine  on   a  Book  of  Common   Prayer. 
The  instructions,  far  from  proving  injurious,  had  the  con- 
trary effect;  by  showing,  as  well  the  necessity  of  a  duly  f 
constituted    ecclesiastical    body,   as   the    futility  of  taking 
measures  to  be  reviewed  and  authoritatively  judged  of,  in 
the  bodies  of  which  we  were  the  deputies.     Such  a  system  \ 
appeared  so  evidently  fruitful  of  discord  and  disunion,  that  ) 
it  was  abandoned  from  this  time.     The  author,  who  had  ) 
contemplated  the  meeting  of  the  interfering  instructions 
with  the  motion  recorded  as  his  own  on  the  journal,  was 
especially  pleased  with  the  effect  6TTt — the  silence  of  un- 
necessary discussion. 

Between  the  deputies  of  the  churches  which  had  re- 
ceived, and  those  of  the  churches  which  had  rejected,  the 
Proposed  Book,  or  else  been  silent  on  the  subject,  the  ex- 
pedient was  adopted  of  letting  matters  remain  for  a  time 
in  the  present  state  with  both. 

The  question  of  the  Scottish  Episcopacy  gave  occasion 

*  See  Conn.  Church  Documents  by  Hawkes  and  Perry,  II.,  pp.  298,  9.     Ed. 


1.32  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

to  some  warmth.  That  matter  was  struck  at  by  certain 
motions  which  appear  on  the  journals,  and  which  particu- 
larly affected  two  gentlemen  of  the  body;  one  of  whom — 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Pilmore — had  been  ordained  by  Bishop  Sea- 
bury;  and  the  otfier,  the  Rev.  William  Smith — the  younger 
gentleman  of  the  convention  of  that  name — had  been  or- 
dained by  a  bishop  of  the  Church,  in  which  Bishop  Sea- 
bury  had  been  consecrated.  The  convention  did  not  enter 
into  the  opposition  to  the  Scottish  succession.  A  motion,  j 
as  may  be  seen  on  the  journals,  was  made  to  the  effect,  by  \ 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Provoost,  seconded  by  the  Rev.  Robert  Smith,  | 
of  South  Carolina,  who  only,  of  the  clergy,  were  of  that  ' 
mind.  But  the  subject  was  suppressed — as  the  journal 
shows — by  the  previous_quesdon,  moved  by  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Smith,  and  seconded  by  the  author.  Nevertheless,  as  it 
had  been  affirmed  that  gentlemen  ordained  under  the 
Scottish  succession,  settling  in  the  represented  churches, 
were  understood  by  some  to  be  under  canonical  subjection 
to  the  bishop  who  ordained  them,  and  as  this  circumstance 
had  been  urged  in  argument,  the  proposal  of  rejecting 
settlements  under  such  subjection  was  adopted;  although 
Mr.  Pilmore  denied  that  any  such  thing  had  been  exacted 
of  him.  As  the  measure  is  stated  on  the  journal  to  have 
been  carried  on  the  motion  of  the  author,  he  thinks  it 
proper  to  mention,  that  he  never  conceived  of  there  hav- 
ing been  any  ground  for  it,  other  than  in  the  apprehen- 
sion which  had  been  expressed.*  This  temperate  guarding 
against  the  evil,  if  it  should  exist,  seemed  the  best  way  of 
obviating  measures,  which  might  have  led  to  disputes  with 
the  northern  clergy.  The  line  of  conduct  taken  drew  off 
from  the  meditated  rejection  some  lay  gentlemen  who 
would  otherwise  have  warmly  pressed  the  objections  which 
occur,  against  the  circumstance  that  had  been  imagined. 

The  letter  from  the  English  bishops,  in  answer  to  the 
address  of  the  former  convention,  came  to  hand  not  long 

•  Conn.  Church  Documents,  II.,  p.  300.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  133 

before  the  meeting  of  this.  All  that  could  be  done  in  the 
present  stage  of  the  business,  was  to  acknowledge  the  kind- 
ness of  their  letter,  to  repeat  the  application  for  the  Epis- 
copacy, and  to  reassure  them  of  attachment  to  the  system 
of  the  Church  of  England.  This  was  accordingly  done,  in 
a  letter  drafted  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  but  considerably 
altered  on  a  motion  of  the  Hon.  John  Jay,  Esq.,  who  thought 
the  draft  too  submissive.  It  was  in  substance  an  expression 
of  gratitude  for  the  fatherly  sentiments  contained  in  the 
letter  of  the  right  reverend  prelates;  an  assurance  of  there 
being  no  intention  of  departing  from  the  constituent  princi- 
ples of  the  Church  of  England;  an  expectation  that  the 
proposed  alterations  had  been  received;  and  a  repetition  of 
the  request  of  the  former  address. 

This  second  application  went  with  no  small  advantage, 
from  the  alterations  made  in  the  constitution,  before  the 
receiving  of  the  objections  made  against  it,  on  the  part  of 
the  English  bishops.  The  issue  of  this  branch  of  the  busi- 
ness may  serve,  not  only  for  a  caution  against  being  precip- 
itate, but  for  encouragement  under  inconveniences  result- 
ing from  the  precipitancy  of  others.  In  the  preceding  year, 
the  points  alluded  to  were  determined  on  with  too  much 
warmth,  and  without  investigation  proportioned  to  the  im- 
portance of  the  subjects.  The  decisions  of  that  day  were 
now  reversed — not  to  say  without  a  division,  but — without 
even  an  opposition. 

The  general  temper  of  moderation  displayed  in  the  let- 
ter of  the  archbishops  caused  it  to  be  a  matter  of  surprise, 
that  the  only  thing  which  looked  like  a  condition  made  on 
the  subject  of  the  Common  Prayer  Book,  was  the  restoring 
of  the  clause  concerning  the  Descent  into  Hell,  in  the 
Apostles'  Creed.  The  undeniable  fact,  that  the  clause  had 
been  an  addition  to  the  original  creed,  occasioned  a  criti- 
cism on  tneexpression  in  the  letter — its  "integrity";  to 
which,  it  was  required  to  be  "  restored."  Besides,  as  the 
clause  is  not  understood  in  the  general  acceptation  of  the 
words,  and  as  they  who  hold  it  in  the  strict  sense  must 


134  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

ground  it  on  very  uncertain  authority  of  Scripture,  it  was 
thought,  that  more  stress  was  laid  on  this  particular  than 
the  comparative  importance  of  the  alteration  merited.  This 
,can  be  accounted  for  no  otherwise,  than  by  the  facts  which 
have  been  mentioned.  It  is  true,  that  the  clause  is  stated 
to  have  been  introduced,  in  opposition  to  an  ancient  heresy 
— meaning  the  Apollinarian.  Is  it  necessary,  then,  that 
every  heresy  should  be  denied  in  so  short  a  formulary  as 
that  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  ? 

The  members  of  the  convention  were  doubtful,  how  far 
the  restoring  of  the  Athanasian  Creed  was  contemplated 
by  the  archbishops  as  an  essential  condition.  In  that  case, 
the  matter  was  desperate;  because,  although  there  were 
some  who  favored  a  compliance,  the  majority  were  deter-  I 
mined  otherwise,  among  whom  were  two  members  pres-  I 
ent  who  had~been  chosen  to  the  Episcopacy,  and  who 
voted  against  the  restoration,  as  appears  on  the  journal. 
It  was  however  thought,  that  the  words  did  not  import 
absolute  requisition.  The  author  will  here  record  his  opin- 
ion, afterward  formed  in  England.  It  is,  that  the  inclina- 
tion of  the  archbishops  on  that  head  was,  not  to  give  any 
trouble,  but  only  to  avoid  any  act  or  omission,  which 
might  have  been  an  implicating  of  them  and  of  their 
Church.  His  reason  is,  that  in  one  of  the  conversations  of 
Bishop  Provoost  and  himself  with  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, he  brought  this  matter  forwards;  evidently  in- 
tending to  say  as  much  of  it  as  he  did,  and  no  more,  and 
not  wishing  a  discussion  of  the  point.  What  he  said,  was 
to  this  effect: — "Some  wish  that  you  had  retained  the 
Athanasian  Creed:  but  I  can  not  say  that  I  am  uneasy  on 
the  subject;  for  you  have  retained  the  doctrine  of  it  in  your 
Liturgy;  and  as  to  the  Creed  itself,  I  suppose  you  thought 
it  not  suited  to  the  use  of  a  congregation."  Then,  without 
waiting  to  hear  whether  this  were  the  reason  or  not,  he 
passed  to  another  subject;  and  never  introduced  that  of  the 
Athanasian  Creed  again. 

It  was  a  matter  of  wonder,  that  there  was  not  laid  in 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  135 

the  letter,  more  stress  on  the  Nicene  Creed,  than  on  the 
Athanasian.  To  the  latter,  there  are  other  objections 
than  its  protest  against  Arianism  and  Socinianism:  objec- 
tions which  have  weight  with  many  who  are  not  either 
Socinians  or  Arians.  It  had  been  expected,  that  the  Ni- 
cene, being  the  faith  of  the  early  Church,  would  have  been 
more  strongly  insisted  on  by  the  English  bishops;  of  whom 
not  more  than  two  or  three — and  perhaps  they  unjustly — 
were  suspected  of  being  at  all  inclined  to  the  opinions 
alluded  to.  Probably  the  opposition  to  them,  apparent  in 
the  Liturgy,  was  what  principally  gave  satisfaction.  In 
what  is  here  said,  it  is  not  designed  to  hold  up  the  neces- 
sity of  the  use  of  the  Nicene  Creed  in  the  Liturgy,  but  there 
is  pleaded  for  the  making  of  it  a  part  of  the  declared  faith 
of  the  Church;  which  may  be  done,  without  a  congrega- 
tional repetition  of  it.  Even  to  this  there  is  no  objection 
made.  The  distinction  is  grounded  on  the  circumstance 
that  what  was  sufficient  as  a  symbol  of  profession  in  the 
primitive  Church,  must  be  so  now;  unless  on  the  principle 
already  adverted  to,  of  contradicting  all  errors  in  the  forms 
of  our  devotions.  To  what  this  leads,  is  very  evident;  or 
rather,  it  is  impossible  to  calculate.  The  question  as  to 
the  Nicene  Creed  had  been  determined  in  the  preceding 
session. 

The  moderation  of  the  letter  of  the  Archbishops  on  the 
subject  of  the  ecclesiastical  constitution,  and  especially  the 
manner  of  the  objection  to  the  part  of  it  which  was  cer- 
tainly exceptionable,  was  universally  acknowledged.  Their 
conduct  was  the  more  agreeable  on  this  account,  that  the 
orfence  had  been  done  away  before  the  receipt  of  their 
letter.  The  silence  of  it  in  regard  to  the  including  of  the' 
laity,  gave  a  great  advantage  over  those  of  the  clergy,  who 
were  representing  the  introduction  of  that  order  as  in  oppo- 
sition to  correct  principles  of  ecclesiastical  government. 

The  moderation  which  governed  in  this  convention  must 
be  conspicuous.  One  principal  reason,  was  the  moderation 
of  the  English  prelates.  They  who  were  thought  the  least 


136  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

devoted  to  the  Episcopal  regimen,  acknowledged  the  great 
forbearance  in  there  being  no  such  high  notions  on  the  sub- 
ject as  had  been  avowed  by  some  of  the  clergy  on  our  side 
of  the  Atlantic.  Added  to  this,  there  was  noticed  the  ab- 
sence of  the  most  distant  intimation,  of  offence  taken  at  the 
presumed  independency  of  the  American  Church.  For 
although  the  bishops  could  not  have  denied  this,  consist- 
ently with  the  known  principles  of  their  own  Church,  yet 
it  had  been  reckoned  on  as  a  source  of  difficulty. 

Some  gentlemen,  who  thought  that  the  convention  had 
gone  too  far  as  to  some  points  of  evangelical  doctrine,  were 
highly  gratified  at  finding  more  zeal  in  that  respect  than 
perhaps  they  had  calculated  on.  The  author  had  an  op- 
portunity of  seeing  the  operation  of  this  sentiment  within 
a  few  hours  after  his  receipt  of  the  letter.  There  happen- 
ing to  pass,  near  his  door,  a  worthy  lay-member  of  the  con- 
vention of  1785,  who  had  been  in  the  habit  of  thinking  the 
clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  not  sufficiently  evangelical, 
he  accepted  of  an  invitation  to  walk  in,  and  hear  the  con- 
munication  of  the  bishops.  He  was  highly  delighted;  and 
it  is  not  improbable,  that  this  very  circumstance  contributed 
towards  such  a  zeal  for  our  ecclesiastical  system,  as  induced 
the  same  gentleman,  at  his  decease,  which  was  a  few  years 
afterward,  to  bequeath  a  considerable  legacy,  which  fell 
after  the  decease  of  two  relatives  then  living;  the  income 
to  be  applied  toward  the  support  of  the  Bishop  of  the 
Church  in  Pennsylvania. 

There  was  another  incident,  which  contributed  to  render 
the  proceedings  of  the  convention  temperate;  because  it 
must  have  convinced  them,  that  the  result  of  considerable 
changes  would  have  been  the  disunion  of  the  Church.  The" 
incident  alluded  to,  was  the  reading  of  a  memorial  from  the 
convention  in  New  Jersey,  approving  of  some  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  late  General  Convention;  but  censuring 
others,  and  soliciting  a  change  of  counsels  in  those  particu- 
lars. The  memorial,  as  was  conjectured  at  the  time,  and 
as  the  author  afterward  learned  with  certainty,  was  drawn 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  137 

up  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Chandler,  of  Elizabethtown.  This 
learned  and  respectable  gentleman,  after  having  been  in 
England  during  the  war,  had  returned  to  his  family  and 
former  residence;  laboring  under  a  cancerous  or  scorbutic 
complaint,  which  had  consumed  a  considerable  proportion 
of  his  face.  He  had  been  designed  for  the  contemplated 
bishopric  of  Nova  Scotia,  as  the  author  was  afterwards 
informed  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  His  complaint 
became  too  bad,  to  admit  of  his  undertaking  the  charge. 
The  same  cause  rendered  it  impossible  for  him  to  take  an 
active  part  in  the  organizing  of  the  American  Church. 
The  author  has  no  doubt,  that  his  letter,  written  on  the 
present  occasion,  was  among  the  causes  which  prevented 
the  disorganizing^  of  it.  For  this  memorial,  see  the  Appen- 
dix, No.  7. 

The  present  state  of  things  induced  the  convention, 
before  their  adjournment,  to  appoint  a  committee,  with 
power  to  re-assemble  them  in  Wilmington,  in  the  State  of 
Delaware.  Previously  to  their  adjournment,  they  deter- 
mined on  their  second  address,  already  noticed,  to  the 
English  prelates:  for  which,  see  the  Appendix,  No.  8. 

Soon  after  the  rising  of  the  convention,  there  came  to 
the  author's  hands  a  letter  of  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury 
and  York:  for  which,  see  the  Appendix,  No.  9. 

Shortly  afterward,  there  came  a  letter  from  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  only,  enclosing  a  recently  obtained 
act  of  parliament,  authorizing  the  solicited  consecrations. 
See  the  Appendix,  No.  10. 

On  the  receipt  of  the  letters,  the  committee  exercised 
the  power  committed  to  them,  of  summoning  the  conven- 
tion to  meet  at  Wilmington  on  the  loth  day  of  October. 

On  the  said  day,  the  convention  re-assembled;  and,  Dr. 
Griffith  being  absent,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Provoost  presided. 
But,  before  a  relation  of  what  passed  at  this  meeting, 
occasion  is  taken  to  record  the  comments  generally  made 
on  the  communications  from  England. 

There  was  expressed  general  satisfaction  with  the  testi- 


138  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

monials  to  be  required  of  those  who  might  come  for  the 
Episcopacy;  and  especially  with  the  testimonial  to  be  signed 
by  the  members  of  the  General  Convention.  This  body 
had  not  been  without  their  apprehensions,  that  some  un- 
suitable character,  as  to  morals,  might  be  elected:  and  yet 
for  them  to  have  assumed  a  control  might  have  been  an 
improper  interference  with  the  churches  in  the  individual 
states.  What  was  demanded  by  the  archbishops  went  to 
the  point  in  the  general  wish;  and  yet  was  not  to  be  com- 
plained of  or  evaded  by  any  individual. 

The  question  to  be  determined  on  at  the  present  session 
was — Whether  the  American  Church  would  avail  herself 
of  the  opportunity  of  obtaining  the  Episcopacy;  which  had 
been  so  earnestly  desired,  ever  since  the  settlement  of  the 
colonies;  the  want  of  which  had  been  so  long  complained 
of,  and  which  was  now  held  out  in  offer.  When  the  author 
.  considers  how  much,  besides  the  preference  due  to  Epis- 
copal government,  the  continuance  or  the  restoration  of 
divine  worship  in  the  almost  deserted  churches,  their  very 
existence  as  a  society,  and  of  course  the  interests  of  religion 
and  virtue  were  concerned  in  the  issue,  he  looks  back  with 
a  remnant  of  uneasy  sensation  at  the  hazard  which  this 
question  run;  and  at  the  probability  which  then  threatened, 
that  the  determination  mi^ht  be  contrary  to  what  took 
place.  "  t  y  /y 

On  the  meeting  of  the  convention,  a  committee  were  A/  - 
appointed.     Those  who  acted  in  the  business  were,  from 
New  York,   Rev.   Dr.   Provoost  and  James  Duane,  Esq.  ;»/v, 
from  New  Jersey,  Rev.  Uzal  Ogden  and  Henry  Waddell,^^,, 
't/fjf]      Esq-  ;    from    Pennsylvania,    Rev.    Dr.    White    and    Samuel^y  y£///>n 

Powel,    Esq.;    from    Delaware,    Rev.    Sydenham    Thorne;  ,,  «  *> 
"  from  Maryland,  Rev.  Dr.  Smith;  and  from  South  Carolina,  *•' 
Rev.  Robert  Smith.     We  sat  up  the  whole  of  the  succeeding* 
night,  digesting  the  determinations  in  the  form  in  which    \   t 
they  appear  on  the  journal.     When  they  were  brought  into  ^ 
the  conveation,  little  difficulty  occurred  in  regard  to  what 
was  proposed  concerning  the  retaining  of  the  Nicene  and^ 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  139 

the  rejecting  of  the  Athanasian  Creed.  But  a  warm  debate 
arose  on  the  subject  of  the  Descent  into  HeO,  in  the  Apostles' 
Creed.  Although  this  was  at  last  carried,  agreeably  to  the 
proposal  of  the  committee;  yet  whoever  looks  into  the  jour- 
nal will  see,  that  the  result  was  not  owing  to  the  having  of 
a  majority  of  votes,  but  to  the  nullity  of  the  votes  of  those  | 
churches  in  which  the  clergy  and  the  laity  were  divided. 

Had  the  issue  "been  different,  there  could  have  been  no 
proceeding  to  England  for  consecration  at  this  time,  be- 
cause they  who  went  had  all  along  made  up  their  minds 
not  to  go,  until  the  way  should  be  opened  by  previous  ne- 
gotiation. As  the  matter  now  stood,  there  was  evidently 
no  ground  on  which  the  English  bishops  could  have  rejected 
the  persons  sent,  unless  they  had  made  the  Athanasian 
Creed  an  essential;  which  would  not  have  been  warranted 
by  the  feeble  recommendation  of  their  letter,  not  to  say  by 
the  impossibility  of  justifying  to  the  world  the  withholding 
of  Episcopal  succession,  for  no  other  reason  than  this,  from 
a  Church  descended  from  their  own,  and  once  a  part  of  it. 
It  is  here  supposed,  that  the  very  awkward  appearance  on 
the  journal  of  the  preceding  vote,  must  have  attracted  the 
attention  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  of  those 
whom  he  consulted;  for  he  took  occasion  to  remark,  what 
he  thought  the  exceptionable  plan  of  making  the  records  on 
the  journal  so  particular.  His  cautious  avoiding  of  minute 
'  discussion,  especially  in  the  way  of  censure,  induced  us  to 
account  for  this  remark  in  the  way  stated. 

An  address  to  the  two  archbishops  was  drawn  up  by  this 
convention,  to  be  forwarded  by  the  two  bishops-elect  pres- 
ent in  it,  who  now  declared  their  intention  of  embarking 
for  England.  See  for  it,  the  Appendix,  No.  n. 

It  would  be  a  withholding  of  justice  from  a  highly  deserv- 
ing gentleman,  not  to  notice  his  zeal  and  probably  his  in- 
fluence, in  accomplishing  the  views  of  the  American  Church. 

The  hostility  to  the  Scotch  Episcopacy  had  derived  some 
weight  from  scruples  on  the  subject,  which  were  communi- 
cated by  Granville  Sharp,  Esq.,  the  author  of  many  learned 


140  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

publications,  himself  being  of  a  religious  and  amiable  char- 
acter, and  zealous  for  the  system  of  the  Church  of  England. 
In  a  letter  to  Dr.  Manning,  a  Baptist  minister,  and  presi- 
dent of  Rhode  Island  College,  who  had  been  recently  in 
England,  Mr.  Sharp  had  expressed  his  doubts  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  Scotch  Episcopacy,  grounded  on  documents  in 
his  hands,  of  his  grandfather,  Archbishop  Sharp,  who  was 
so  conspicuous  for  his  opposition  to  the  arbitrary  measures 
of  James  II.  Dr.  Manning  had  communicated  the  informa- 
tion in  such  a  line,  as  that  it  was  privately  circulated  during 
the  convention  of  1785.  On  its  being  urged  in  conversation, 
advantage  was  taken  on  the  other  side  of  the  singularity  of 
the  channel  of  communication.*  This,  however,  was  acci- 
dental; it  not  appearing  that  the  writer  contemplated  any 
public  effect.  He  afterward  watched  the  progress  of  the 
business,  and  gave  his  aid  in  every  step  of  it. 

Before  the  meeting  of  the  adjournment,  there  had  been 
sent  to  the  author  by  Dr.  Franklin,  then  president  of  the 
state,  a  letter  to  him  from  Mr.  Sharp,  manifesting  Christian 
concern  in  the  business  pending,  uneasiness  at  some  reports 
which  had  reached  England,  of  our  declining  towards  So- 
cinianism,  and  satisfaction  from  some  discoveries  which 
contradicted  the  reports.  In  the  letter  to  Dr.  Franklin, 
there  were  extracts  of  letters  written  by  Mr.  Sharp  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  evincive  of  interest  taken  in  our 
behalf.  In  some  late  publications  in  England,  there  have 
been  erroneous  statements  of  the  agency  of  Mr.  Sharp. 
For  this  reason,  and  to  manifest  the  Christian  zeal  of  that 
worthy  person,  his  communications  are  given  in  the  Appen- 
dix, No.  12. 

Afterward,  when  Bishop  Provoost  and  the  author  were 
in  England,  they  became  acquainted  with  the  said  worthy 
person,  who  continued  to  interest  himself  for  the  Church. 
On  a  certain  day,  he  made  us  a  visit,  and  expressed  much 
solicitude  on  the  subject  of  our  business,  which  he  sup- 

•  See  Journals,  III.,  272.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  141 

posed,  from  its  not  having  been  accomplished  immediately, 
to  have  met  with  some  interruption.     He  was  on  his  way 
to  visit  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  intending,  he  said, 
to  remind  his  Grace  of  some  things  by  which  he  seemed  to 
stand  pledged,  considering  the  shape  in  which  the  matter 
was  now  before  him.    Mr.  Sharp  was  thanked  for  his  benev-' 
olent  zeal,  but  was  requested  not  to  offer  to  the  Archbishop^ 
any  thing  in  the  way  of  complaint,  and  was  informed  that 
there  was  no  room  for  any;  his  Grace  having  intimated  that, 
the  short  delay  would  be  only  until  the  ensuing  meeting 
parliament.     There  was  also  given  to  Mr.  Sharp  the  reason* 
of  this  short  delay,  which  will  appear  in  its  proper  place. 1 

Before  the  declaration  made  by  two  of  the  bishops-elect, 
of  their  intention  to  embark  for  England,  there  was  per- 
ceived a  difficulty  likely  to  occur  in  the  case  of  Dr.  Pro- 
voost,  on  account  of  subscription  to  be  made  as  proposed 
by  the  convention  of  1785,  and  considered  as  satisfactory 
by  the  English  bishops.  The  convention  in  New  York 
had  held  in  suspense  the  proposed  Liturgy,  including  the 
Articles.  This  was  the  faith  and  the  worship  recognized  in 
the  constitution,  and  not  yet  adopted  by  the  Church  in 
which  Dr.  Provoost  was  to  preside. 

To  meet  this  difficulty,  the  convention  adopted  the  ex- 
pedient of  a  form  to  be  subscribed  by  him,  and  by  any 
other  person  in  the  same  circumstances.  The  form  bound 
the  subscriber  to  the  use  of  the  English  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  except  so  far  as  it  had  been  altered  in  consequence 
of  the  civil  revolution,  until  the  Proposed  Book  should  be 
ratified  by  the  convention  of  the  state  in  which  the  party 
lived,  and  to  the  use  of  the  latter  book,  when  so  ratified.  A 
promise  to  this  effect  was  signed  by  Dr.  Provoost,  and  the 
document  is  in  possession  of  the  author.  It  is  part  of  an  act 
of  the  present  convention,  predicated  on  the  requisitions 
of  the  Archbishops.  See  for  it,  the  Appendix,  No.  13. 

The  provision  thus  made  by  the  convention  did  not 
altogether  relieve  Dr.  Provoost  from  the  difficulty.  Sub- 
scription was  to  be  repeated  in  England,  agreeably  to  the 


I42  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

requisition  of  the  Archbishops,  doubtless  with  the  concur- 
rence of  the  bishops  generally.     It  was  not  probable,  that 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  would  accommodate  to  an- 
other form,  without  further  consultation,  which  would  at 
least   have   occasioned    trouble   and    delay.     Dr.   Provoost 
candidly  stated  his  situation  in  this  particular  to  the  Arch- 
bishop, to  whom  the  disclosure  was  evidently  unexpected. 
After  a  short  pause  the  author  remarked,  that  if  in  Eng-\ 
land  any  changes  should  be  made  in  the  ecclesiastical  insti-  ' 
tutions,  by  competent  authority,  and  in  themselves  not  con- 
trary to  Christian  doctrine,  the  subscription  of  the  clergy  I 
would  not — it  was  supposed — be  hindered  by  the  ordina-  y 
tion  vows  by  which  they  were  now  bound.     On  a  look  of/ 
appeal  to  the  Archbishop  for  the  correctness  of  this  senti- 
ment, he  assented  to  it  unequivocally.     He  would  never 
have  given  a  decision  on  the  special  case  of  Dr.  Provoost: 
but  the  supposed  case  had  so  evident  a  bearing  on  it,  that 
the  scruple  was  dismissed.     It  had  rested  on  the  mind  of 
the  Doctor,  who,  on  a  question  of  truth  and  honor,  would 
not  have  erred  on  the  side  of  laxity,  in  regard  to  promise 
to  be  pledged. 


H.     Page  27.     Of  Personal  Intercourse  luitJi  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury. 

Sundry  matters  having  passed  in  this  intercourse  which 
may  be  thought  connected  with  the  subject  of  these  sheets, 
the  author  supposes  that  it  may  be  of  use  to  insert  in  this 
place  certain  letters,  which  he  addressed  from  England  to 
the  committee  of  the  Church  in  Pennsylvania,  with  notes 
taken  for  another  letter  intended  to  have  been  written,  if 
an  opportunity  had  offered.  The  committee  were  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Samuel  Magaw,  the  Rev.  Robert  Blackwell,  and  the 
Rev.  Joseph  Pilmore  of  the  clergy;  and  of  the  laity,  the 
Hon.  Francis  Hopkinson,  Dr.  Gerardus  Clarkson,  and  John 
Swanwick,  Esquire. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  143 

Westminster,  December  6, 


GENTLEMEN: 

I  think  it  my  duty,  and  it  is  my  inclination,  to  embrace 
the  earliest  opportunity  of  acquainting  you  with  my  arrival 
in  England,  and  of  the  progress  made,  by  the  blessing  of 
God,  in  the  important  business  of  my  voyage. 

On  Thursday,  the  2d  of'  November,  I  embarked  at  New 
York,  in  company  of  my  worthy  friend  and  brother,  'Dr. 
Provoost.  The  next  day  we  left  land.  After  a  passage, 
in  which  we  had  some  tempestuous,  although  for  the  most 
part  pleasant  weather,  we  made  the  lights  of  Scilly,  on 
Monday,  the  2Oth  of  the  same  month,  and  the  next  day 
landed,  in  good  health,  at  Falmouth.  In  giving  this  ac-  / 
count  of  my  prosperous  voyage,  I  am  happy  in  the  con-  \/f*7<**  ^ 
viction  that  I  am  writing  to  those  who,  as  well  from  pri- 
vate friendship,  as  from  their  interest  in  the  great  concerns 
of  the  Church,  will  rejoice  with  me  on  the  occasion,  and 
join  me  in  devout  acknowledgments  to  Almighty  God. 

Owing  to  sundry  incidents,  we  did  not  reach  the  me- 
tropolis until  Wednesday,  the  29th,  when  we  made  it  our 
first  business  to  wait  on  his  Excellency,  Mr.  Adams,  who 
politely  returned  our  visit,  on  the  evening  of  the  same  day, 
and  finding  that  it  was  our  wish  to  be  introduced  by  him  to 
his  Grace,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  readily  undertook 
the  office,  and  named  Friday  for  the  purpose.  Accordingly, 
on  that  day  we  accompanied  Mr.  Adams  to  the  palace  of 
Lambeth.  His  Grace  having  received  no  intimation  of  the 
intended  visit,  was  not  at  home.  In  the  evening,  Colonel 
Smith,  the  secretary  of  the  legation,  waited  on  him,  to 
request  the  appointment  of  an  hour:  he  named  twelve 
o'clock,  on  Monday.  At  that  time,  we  again  accompanied 
Mr.  Adams  to  Lambeth,  where  we  had  a  polite  and  con- 
descending reception,  entirely  answerable  to  the  sentiments 
which  we  had  been  taught  to  entertain  of  this  great  and 
good  Archbishop. 

After  some  questions  on  his  part  respecting  our  pas- 
sage, we  presented  our  papers:  on  which  we  were  asked  — 


144  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Whether  we  expected  another  gentleman,  in  time  to  be 
consecrated  with  us  ?  In  answer  to  this,  his  Grace  was 
informed,  that  the  Rev.  Dr.  Griffith,  the  only  gentleman 
recommended  by  the  General  Convention  beside  the  pres- 
ent company,  would  not,  in  all  probability,  be  over  before 
the  spring.  Here  I  must  note,  that  my  saying  of  this  was 
in  consequence  of  a  letter  received  from  that  gentleman 
after  my  embarkation. 

Dr.  Provoost  then  mentioned  that  there  was  a  peculiar- 
ity in  the  charter  of  his  church,  requiring  his  presence  at 
the  annual  election  at  Easter:  on  which  his  Grace  said, 
that  he  had.no  inclination  to  detain  us  so  long,  and  indeed 
would  give  us  no  delay,  provided  our  papers  should  be 
found  satisfactory,  which  he  presumed  would  be  the  case. 
But  at  the  same  time  he  apologized  for  his  postponing  of 
our  business  for  two  or  three  days,  being  engaged  in  some 
ecclesiastical  business,  depending  before  the  privy  council, 
and  also  in  some  concerns  of  a  college,  of  which  he  is  the 
visitor.  He  added,  that  when  this  was  done,  he  would  see 
us  again.  In  the  course  of  the  conversation,  the  Arch- 
bishop asked  me,  whether  I  had  received  the  letter  signed 
by  himself  alone,  in  which  he  had  mentioned  that  three 
was  a  sufficient  number  to  be  sent  for  consecration,  and 
whether  we  understood  it  to  be  the  sentiment  that  three 
only  should  come.  On  his  being  told  that  the  letter  ha3 
been  received,  and  so  understood,  he  gave  the  reason — 
That  as  the  present  service  was  asked  of  the  Church  of 
England,  in  consequence  of  an  extraordinary  exigency,  it 
seemed  proper  to  do  no  more  in  the  affair,  than  the  exi- 
gency required,  and  to  leave  all  subsequent  measures  for  the 
continuing  of  our  ministry,  to  be  taken  among  ourselves.* 

This  is,  gentlemen,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  the 
substance  of  the  conversation;  and  we  shall  be  daily  in  ex- 
pectation of  renewing  our  intercourse  with  his  Grace. 

Having  paid  our  respects  in  the  first  place»to  the  Arch- 

•  See  ante,  p.  26.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  145 

bishop,  we  were  of  opinion  that  it  was  our  duty  to>  wait  on 
the  Lord  Bishop  of  London;  his  Lordship's  predecessors 
having  been  the  diocesans  of  our  Church;  although  we  un- 
derstood, that  the  present  Bishop — the  venerable  DrJLowth  ) 
— had  undergone  a  decay  of  his  great  talents,  as  well  as 
labored  under  grievous  bodily  complaints.  Accordingly  we 
waited  yesterday  on  the  Rev.  Mr.  Eaton,  his  chaplain,  by 
whom  I  had  been  hospitably  entertained  when  formerly  in 
this  country.  Mr.  Eaton,  after  much  conversation  con- 
cerning the  affairs  of  our  Church,  stated  to  us  his  Lord- 
ship's situation,  mentioning,  among  other  things,  his  debil-  / 
ity  of  mind  to  be  such,  that  although  he  should  answer  a 
question  properly  and  pointedly,  yet  he  might  in  half  an 
hour,  forget  both  the  question  and  the  answer:  and  his  in- 
disposition was  so  considerable,  that  a  morning  might  be 
appointed,  and  yet,  when  the  time  should  come,  his  Lord- 
ship might  be  incapable  of  receiving  us.  These  things  he 
thought  it  necessary  to  mention,  but  doubted  not  that 
there  would  be  named  an  early  day  for  our  introduction. 
Accordingly,  in  the  evening,  we  received  a  note  from  Mr. 
Eaton,  appointing  to-morrow  morning  for  the  interview. 

I  have  the  pleasure  of  acquainting  you,  gentlemen,  that 
we  find  from  many,  who  had  conversed  with  the  Arch- 
bishop before  our  arrival,  of  there  not  being  the  least  doubt 
of  our  Church's  having  retained  the  essential  doctrines  of 
the  gospel,  as  held  by  the  Church  of  England. 

These,  gentlemen,  are  the  particulars,  which  I  have 
thought  it  important  to  convey  to  you.  By  the  next 
packet  I  intend,  if  it  please  God,  to  acquaint  you  with  any 
further  progress  that  may  be  made  in  the  business  com- 
mitted to  me;  and  I  remain,  in  the  mean  time,  with  my 
prayers  for  your  health  and  happiness, 

Your  affectionate  brother, 
and  very  humble  servant, 

WM.  WHITE. 

The  Committee  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
n  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania. 


146  MEMOIRS   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

P.  S.  I  trust  there  will  be  no  occasion,  that  my  friends 
should  write  to  me  after  the  receipt  of  this.  But  they  will 
not  expect,  that  in  the  present  stage  of  the  business,  I 
should  fix  the  time  of  my  leaving  England. 


Westminster,  January  I,  1787. 
GENTLEMEN, 

I  embrace  the  opportunity  of  the  packet  of  this  month, 
to  communicate  to  you  the  present  state  of  the  business, 
on  which  I  am  in  England. 

Between  the  writing  of  my  last  and  our  hearing  from 
the  Archbishop,  there  intervened  about  a  fortnight:  during 
which  Dr.  Provoost  and  myself  had  been  informed  by 
several  who  had  seen  his  Grace,  particularly  by  the  Lord 
Bishop  of  Oxford,  that  our  papers  were  satisfactory.  The 
delay  was  accounted  for  by  certain  business  that  required 
immediate  attention.  At  the  end  of  that  term,  we  received 
an  invitation  from  the  Archbishop  to  dine  with  him  on  the 
2 1  st.  We  accordingly  attended,  and  had  every  reason  to 
be  satisfied  with  our  reception  and  entertainment.  His 
Grace  did  not  introduce  the  subject  of  our  application  to 
him  until  our  leaving  the  company,  when  he  stepped  aside 
with  us,  and  mentioned,  as  near  as  my  memory  serves,  to 
the  following  effect — That  having,  from  the  beginning,  con- 
sulted the  Bench  of  Bishops  on  this  business,  he  was  de- 
sirous of  taking  their  opinion,  as  to  the  manner  of  accom- 
plishing it — That  he  had  shown  our  papers  to  a  few  who 
were  in  town — That  he  expected  to  see  more  of  them  in  a 
short  time — And  that  he  would  then  see  us  again.  We 
have  not  heard  from  him  since;  for  the  greater  number  of 
the  bishops  are  still  at  their  respective  dioceses,  although 
expected  to  be  in  town  soon. 

In  my  last  I  mentioned  our  intention  of  waiting  on  the 
Lord  Bishop  of  London,  as  an  instance  of  the  respect 
which  we  thought  due  from  us,  to  the  successor  of  the  for- 
mer diocesans  of  America.  We  accordingly  attended  on 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  147 

the  day  appointed  by  himself,  and  were  courteously  re- 
ceived by  this  celebrated  prelate,  who  expressed  himself 
gratified  by  our  waiting  on  him,  and  asked  for  our  address, 
as  intending  to  see  us  again;  which  however  can  hardly 
happen,  as  his  Lordship  has  been  since  taken  extremely  ill, 
and,  I  believe,  continues  in  imminent  danger.* 

I  fully  expected  to  have  mentioned  to  you,  gentlemen, 
by  this  opportunity,  the  time  of  the  accomplishment  of  the 
purpose,  for  which  you  desired  me  to  come.  Although 
disappointed  in  this,  I  can  express  to  you  my  full  persua- 
sion, that  the  delay  does  not  arise  from  any  cause,  which 
can  defeat  our  object. 

With  my  constant  prayers  for  yourselves  and  our  whole 
Church,  I  am,  gentlemen, 

Your  affectionate  brother, 

WM.  WHITE. 

The  Committee  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 

in  Pennsylvania.  >'. 

P.  S.  January  2.  This  morning,  the  Lord  Bishop  of 
Landaff  did  us  the  honor,  on  his  coming  to  town,  to  call  on 
us,  without  waiting  for  our  being  introduced  to  him,  and 
to  desire  us  to  appoint  a  day  for  our  dining  with  him.  I 
mention  this,  to  enable  me  to  confirm  the  sentiment  al- 
ready expressed;  because  his  Lordship,  not  only  showed 
the  utmost  good  will  as  to  our  business,  but  seemed  sur- 
prised that  it  was  not  already  finished,  until  we  mentioned 
the  reason  of  the  Archbishop,  whom  his  Lordship  had  not 
seen. 


*  We  probably  saw  this  eminent  man  on  the  last  day  on  which  our  visit  could 
have  been  received.  His  appearance  was  that  of  health,  and  he  followed  us  to 
the  head  of  his  stairs,  without  any  appearance  of  debility.  We  understood  that 
he  had  a  violent  return  of  his  disease  (the  stone)  the  next  day;  and  he  died  very 
soon  after  our  departure  from  England.  In  the  conversation  of  about  an  hour 
which  we  held  with  him,  he  made  various  inquiries  concerning  America,  and  was 
the  most  pointed  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  On  being  informed  of  the  then  late  act 
in  Pennsylvania  for  the  gradual  abolition  of  it,  he  answered  with  strong  emphasis 
— That  is  a  very  good  measure. 


148  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Westminster,  January  20,  1787. 
GENTLEMEN, 

I  now  address  you,  with  the  pleasing  prospect  of  being 
soon  able  to  re-embark  for  America,  after  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  business  committed  to  me.  It  is  possible, 
indeed,  that  I  may  arrive  before  the  vessel,  by  which  this 
letter  will  be  conveyed.  Even  in  that  case,  it  may  serve 
for  a  continuation  of  the  narrative  of  the  proceedings*  of  my 
honored  colleague  and  myself.  And  as  there  is  entire 
harmony  between  us,  both  of  sentiment  and  of  affection,  I 
shall,  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  omit  distinguishing  between 
us  in  the  following  account;  using  the  plural  number,  in 
stating  any  thing  that  was  said  by  either  of  us  on  the 
occasion. 

After  my  last  letter,  we  received  from  the  Archbishop, 
through  a  friend  who  had  spoken  to  him  on  the  subject, 
full  satisfaction,  that  the  delay  arose  from  no  other  cause 
than  his  Grace's  waiting  for  the  arrival  of  the  bishops;  and 
that  it  was  his  intention  to  finish  the  transaction  in  time  for 
our  departure  by  the  February  packet;  it  being  the  oppor- 
tunity, by  which  he  had  understood  from  us,  that  it  was  our 
inclination  to  return. 

The  Queen's  birthday,  and  the  near  approach  of  the 
meeting  of  parliament,  have  brought  to  town  many  of  the 
right  reverend  bench.  Accordingly,  we  received  yesterday 
a  note  from  the  Archbishop,  desiring  us  to  call  on  him  this 
morning.  We  attended,  and  had  a  conversation  of  two 
hours;  of  which  it  is  now  my  intention  to  give  you  the 
substance,  as  far  as  my  memory  serves,  and  as  is  connected 
with  the  affairs  of  our  Church. 

His  Grace  began  with  expressing  his  hopes  that  we  had 
not  thought  him  inattentive  to  our  business.  He  said,  that 
soon  after  our  arrival,  he  had  mentioned  the  matter  to  the 
King;  that  the  necessary  powers  from  government  would 
be  soon  obtained;  and  that  the  consecration  should  be 
either  on  the  28th  instant,  or  on  that  day  seven-night;  and 
that  the  latter  day  the  best  suited  his  convenience,  and 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  149 

should  be  made  the  appointment,  provided  it  were  consist- 
ent with  our  intentions  of  returning  by  the  packet. 

After  making  the  suitable  acknowledgments  of  his  good- 
^  ness,  and  declaring  our  full  conviction  that  he  had  used  all 
possible  expedition,  we"  said,  that  the  day  after  the  last 
mentioned  Sunday  was  the  intended  time  of  our  departure, 
in  the  event  of  our  being  ready  for  the  packet;  and  that, 
therefore,  we  could  not  press  for  the  matter  to  be  expedited,  / 
sooner  than  was  convenient  to  his  Grace. 

He  then  gently  touched  on  the  subject,  in  regard  to  which 
our  last  convention  had  not  complied  with  the  recommenda-  (  *  .     ^ 
tion  of  the  two  Archbishops.     He  said,  that  some  were  dis-  i^rfA-«^ 
satisfied  with  the  omission  of  the  Creed  here  alluded  to; 
that,  for  his  part,  he  was  not  uneasy  on  the  head,  being 
satisfied  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Creed  is  retained  in  many 
places  of  the  Prayer  Book;  but  that,  however,  he  did  not  / 
like  the  manner  in  which  it  appeared  on  the  minutes;  pre-  - 
ferred  the  mode  of  doing  business  used  in  all  the  bodies 
with  which  he  was  acquainted;  among  whom,  it  was  cus- 
tomary to  mention  the  business  brought  before  them,  and 
the  result  of  the  debate,  without  specifying  the  votes  of  the 
individual  members.     Whether  his  Grace  had  here  a  view  „ 
to  the  votes  of  those  whom  he  was  addressing  in  regard  to ' 
the  Athanasian  Creed,  we  did  not  know;  but  the  answer 


which  he  received  was  to  this  purpose  —  That  if  the  conven-  nj(^} 
tion  had  taken  a  wrong  method  in  the  above  particular,  it    ' 
proceeded  from  their  wish  to  show  themselves  open  and        -*-*** 


did;  and  that  the  Church  in  one  of  the  states,  had  instruct-,^  •£*,  JL 
ed  their  deputies  to  move  for  the  so  specifying  of  the  votes. 
His  Grace  then  said,  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  business, 
there  had  been  many  reports  and  apprehensions;  that-  this 
required  of  the  bishops  to  be  circumspect;  and  that  even 
when  our  proceedings  arrived,  there  were  some  things  ** 


,  . 

which  they  could  not  but  wish  otherwise.     And  here,  saidC^* 
he,  I  am  not  alluding  to  the  Liturgy,  but  to  the  very  easy 
manner  in  which  the  degradation  of  bishops  seems  allowed 
to  be  done.     It  was  remarked  to  his  Grace,  that  the  offen- 


150  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

sivc    article   had   been   altered.     He   answered — Yes,    and 
. ,          much  for  the  better. 

From  this,  his  Grace  passed  to  some  remarks  concerning 
the  Psalter.  He  said,  that  whatever  use  there  might  be 
in  leaving  out  some  parts  of  the  Psalms,  he  saw  no  pro- 
priety in  altering  the  connection,  in  the  manner  in  which 
we  had  done  it.  He  did  not  mean  to  undervalue  the  abili- 
ties of  those  employed  in  it,  but  thought  it  was  a  work  of 
more  time  and  difficulty  than  they  seem  to  have  conceived. 
From  a  desire  of  taking  his  Grace's  meaning  precisely  on 
this  subject,  it  was  here  mentioned  to  him,  that  if  we  un- 
derstood him,  he  did  not  object  to  the  omission  of  some 
portions  of  the  Psalms,  from  the  worship  of  the  Church. 
The  reply  was — He  had  not  fully  considered  that  subject; 
and  only  meant  at  present  to  remark  on  the  connecting  of 
portions  together,  in  such  a  manner  as  might  break  the 
connection,  and  alter  the  sense  of  the  original  compositions; 
especially  of  such  of  them  as  are  prophetical.  But  his 
Grace  did  not  allege,  that  the  sense  had  been  actually 
altered  in  any  place. 

In  speaking  of  the  Liturgy,  the  Archbishop  expressed  his 
/  hopes,  that  it  would  not  be  a  matter  liable  to  alterations,  at 
every  convention.  He  was  answered,  that  although  it  was 
still  submitted  to  the  Church  as  a  proposed  Liturgy,  so  as 
to  allow  of  the  correction  of  any  part  of  it,  which  might 
appear,  on  mature  consideration,  to  have  been  hastily  done; 
yet  there  were  no  description  of  men  in  this  country,  who 
would  more  object  to  the  leaving  of  the  Liturgy  in  so  fluc- 
tuating a  state,  than  the  great  body  of  Episcopalians  in 
America. 

The  Archbishop  took  notice  of  a  want  of  formality,  in 
our  not  having  brought  a  regular  instrument  of  our  election: 
although  he  allowed,  that  our  election  was  fully  implied  in- 
the  papers  which  had  been   produced;  so  as  to  leave  no 
j  doubt  of  the  fact.     This  naturally  led  us  to  speak  of  the 
J  forms   of  recommendation,   prescribed  by  the  two   Arch- 
bishops.    In  respect  to  these  we  ventured  to  declare,  that 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  151 

the  Church  at  large  in  America  acknowledged  great  obli- 
gations; and  would  expect  that  their  future  bishops  should  i1 
make  it  a  rule  of  their  conduct.     He  replied,  that  the  ap- 
pointment of  persons  to  the  Episcopal  character  was  of  the 
highest  consequence;  and  earnestly  wished  that  it  may  be       .     . 
managed   with  great   discretion  in  America  and   that  he  &#•   **> 
tfiought  himself  obliged  to  use  the  precautions  which  we  faUuua 
had  mentioned.     For,  said  he,  gentlemen,  you  were  stran-    . 
gers  to  me,  although  I  had  heaid  you  respectfully  spoken  ** 
of.     At  the  same  time,  there  were  some  who  apprehended 
that  persons  of  a  very  unsuitable  description  would  be  sent. 
I  thought  it  improbable — he  continued — that  general  and 
particular  conventions  would  unite  in  recommending  such 
persons;  and  yet  it  was   my  determination,   that  if  such 
should    be    sent,    and    under    circumstances    carrying   full 
evidence  of  the  unsuitableness,  not  to  have  troubled  the 
bishops  with  the  affair,  but  to  have  taken  the  brunt  of  a 
refusal  on  myself.     The  answer  was  to  this  effect — That  if 
there  had  been  any  danger  of  such  a  measure,  the  requi- 
sitions of  the  two  Archbishops  must  have  operated  as  a 
prevention:    that  we   trusted,    however,    there   was   not   a 
sufficient  number  of  our  brethren,  in  any  state,   capable 
of  wilfully  imposing  an  improper  character  on  his  Grace; 
and  that,   therefore,  if  any  such  character  had  been  rec- 
ommended, it  must  have  been  some  years  ago,  and  from 
the  want  of  due  information. 

His  Grace,  in  some  part  of  the  conversation,  was  led  to 
speak  of  the  act  of  parliament:  in  respect  to  which,  we  took 
notice  of  the  clause,  requiring  the  consent  of  the  King,  under 
his  sign  manual.  This  clause,  we  told  him,  we  had  under- 
stood from  private  information,  not  to  have  been  in  the  act 
as  proposed  by  the  bishops.  We  ventured  to  say,  however, 
-that  the  principle  of  the  restriction  was  well  understood  in 
America,  so  as  to  occasion  no  offence  there.  The  Arch- 
bishop answered,  that  it  was  not  in  the  act,  as  proposed  by 
the  bishops,  but  that  he  thought  it  a  very  proper  clause, 
and  that  it  was  particularly  acceptable  to  himself;  since 


1 52  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

otherwise  the  matter  would  have  rested  wholly  with  him, 
which  he  did  not  wish. 

He  introduced  a  subject  which  was  unexpected  to  us, 
and  may  influence  measures  in  America.  He  said,  that, 
\\hen  Bishop  of  Bangor,  he  had  presented  the  Bishop-elect 
of  the  Isle  of  Man  to  the  Archbishop  of  York  for  consecra- 
tion; and  that  none  were  concerned  in  the  consecration 
besides  the  Archbishop  and  himself:  that  he  had  set  on 
foot  an  inquiry,  respecting  past  usage  in  the  province  of 
York:  and  that  if  the  practice  had  been  the  same  in  times 
past,  perhaps  it  might  prove  unnecessary  for  another  gen- 
tleman to  come  from  America.  In  the  conversation  that 
ensued  on  this  head,  it  was  thrown  out  on__our  jide,  that  if 
the  anc|ent  canonical  number  should  be  dispensed  with, 
perhaps  doubts  might  subsist  in  the  minds  of  some,  in  re- 
gard  to  the  validity;  and  that  such  an  apprehension  might 
be  productive  of  some  irregularity  and  inconvenience.  To 
this  the  Archbishop  replied,  that  the  latitude,  if  left,  would 
be  intended  merely  for  our  accommodation,  but  was  by  no 
means  to  prevent  the  coming  of  a  third  applicant,  if  that 
should  be  thought  eligible  by  us.* 

I  think  it  a  matter  worthy  to  be  mentioned  in  this  letter, 
that  the  Archbishop  informed  us  of  thoughts  entertained  by 
him,  of  giving  to  the  world  a  publication,  relative  to  the 
business  before  us,  stating  the  reasons  influencing  him  in 
the  measures  which  he  had  adopted.  We  took  the  liberty 
of  expressing  our  hearty  approbation  of  the  proposal;  and 
as  his  Grace  did  not  seem  to  have  come  to  a  determination, 
we  hoped  that  he  would  find  no  objection  to  it,  on  further 
consideration. 

After  discussing  the  above  mentioned  subjects  more  fully 
than  I  can  be  expected  to  relate,  we  apologized  for  taking 
up  so  much  of  his  Grace's  time,  and  arose  to  take  our  leave. 
But  we  were  encouraged  by  the  condescension  shown,  to 

*  See  ante,  p.  144.  The  Romish  hierarchy  in  America  was  founded  by  a 
s'ngle  bishop,  and  Carroll,  in  turn,  consecrated  Cheverus.  Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  153 

mention,  that  as  the  King  was  to  open  the  parliament  in  a 
few  days,  it  would  be  a  gratification  to  us  to  gain  admit- 
tance to  the  House  of  Lords,  on  that  occasion,  through  the 
good  offices  of  his  Grace.  The  Archbishop  took  this  free- 
dom in  very  good  part,  desired  us  to  consider  him  as  on 
terms  of  friendship,  and  assured  us,  that  he  would  send  us 
a  note  of  admission,  and  express  in  it  the  time  which  his 
Majesty  should  appoint  for  his  coming  to  the  house,  in  order 
to  prevent  our  unnecessary  waiting.* 

I  suppose  that  this  incident  reminded  the  Archbishop  of 
a  question  which  had  been  asked  him  by  Mr.  Adams,  at  our 
first  interview — Whether  it  would  not  be  proper  for  us  to 
wait  on  the  King;  and  whether,  in  that  case,  the  Archbishop 
or  himself  would  be  the  proper  person  to  introduce  us.  To  ( 
this  question  the  Archbishop  had  answered  at  the  time,  that 
the  first  step  was  for  himself  to  be  satisfied,  before_any  no-  \ 
tice  could  properly  be  given  to  the  King.  In  relation  to 
this  subject,  his  Grace  now  said,  that  if  we  were  to  be  intro- 
duced to  the  King,  it  ought  to  be  on  the  ground  of  thank- 
ing him  for  his  leave  given  for  the  ensuing  consecration, 
under  his  sign  manual;  and  that  whether  this  would  be  lia- 
ble to  any  objection  or  not,  we  must  judge.  We  made  no 
scruple  to  answer,  that  there  could  be  no  objection  to  it, 
arising  out  of  the  relations  in  which  we  stood.  He  then 
said,  that  he  supposed  Mr.  Adams  chose  to  introduce  us 
himself.  We  answered,  that  although  the  proposal  origi- 
nated with  Mr.  Adams,  yet  we  believed  he  wished  to  leave 
it  to  his  Grace  to  determine  on  the  manner.  To  this  he  re- 
plied, that  he  would  consider  of  it  further  and  let  us  know. 

His  Grace  then  said,  that  he  was  desirous  of  appointing 
some  day  for  our  dining  with  him  again;  intending  to  ask 
some  of  the  bishops  to  meet  us,  and  also  some  of  our  friends. 
This  lead  us  to  ask  his  Grace's  opinion,  as  to  the  propriety 
of  our  calling  at  the  houses  of  all  the  bishops,  in  order  to 
thank  them  for  the  good  office  soon  to  be  done,  through  the 

*  The  promise  was  fulfilled. 


154  Jlf£MOf£S    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

favor  of  the  whole  bench,  although  especially  of  his  Grace, 
to  the  Episcopal  Church  in  America.  He  answered,  that 
he  thought  it  proper,  and  that  it  would  be  very  kindly  taken. 

As  the  gentlemen  to  whom  I  am  writing  are  members  of 
the  corporation  for  the  widow's  fund,  it  may  be  proper  for 
me  to  inform  them,  that  I  stated  to  his  Grace  the  appoint- 
ment of  Dr.  Smith,  Mr.  Chew,  and  myself,  for  the  address- 
ing of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel, 
respecting  the  arrears  due  on  their  former  grants.  He 
promised  to  consider  of  the  foundation  of  the  intended  ap- 
plication, and  for  that  purpose,  as  I  had  mentioned  my  being 
furnished  with  a  former  abstract  of  the  proceedings  of  our 
corporation,  noticing  the  grants,  he  desired  me  to  send  it  to 
him. 

I  have  given  you,  gentlemen,  a  long,  and,  I  am  afraid, 
tedious  account  of  this  conversation;  but  I  hope  that  the 
motive  will  excuse  me,  which  is  my  desire  of  your  having 
as  complete  a  view  as  possible  of  the  accomplishing  of  a 
negotiation  so  important,  as  we  all  conceive,  to  our  com- 
munion, not  only  of  the  present,  but  also  of  every  future 
generation. 

That  God  may  bless  the  event,  which,  under  his  good 
providence,  is  soon  to  take  place,  is  the  constant  wish  and 
prayer  of,  gentlemen, 

Your  affectionate  brother, 

and  humble  servant, 

WM.  WHITE. 

The  Committee  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  Pennsylvania. 


Materials  for  another  letter  to  the  committee,  if  an  op- 
portunity shoyld  offer,  before  my  reaching  of  Philadelphia. 

Monday^  January  2gth.  We  received  a  verbal  message 
from  the  Archbishop,  desiring  us  to  call  on  him.  We  at- 
tended. His  design  was  to  ask  some  questions  respecting 
the  forms  of  our  testimonials,  and  the  titles  to  be  given  to 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  155 

us  in  our  letters  of  consecration.  We  staid  with  him  nearly 
two  hours,  and  had  much  conversation  with  him,  concern- 
ing the  affairs  of  our  Church;  which  confirmed  us  in  our 
high  opinion  of  his  regard  for  her,  and  of  his  desire  to 
advance  the  interests  of  religion. 

Friday,  February  2d.  The  mornings  of  the  two  preced- 
ing days  had  been  spent  in  visiting  the  different  bishops 
who  were  in  town,  agreeably  to  the  proposal  before  made  to 
the  Archbishop.  A  few  of  them — the  Archbishop  of  York, 
and  the  Bishops  of  Oxford,  Landaff,  Rochester,  and  Bangor, 
had  previously  visited  us;  and  we  had  seen  the  Bishops  of 
Worcester  and  Exeter,  a  few  days  before,  at  the  Archbish- 
op's, at  dinner;  an  occasion  which  I  have  not  particularly 
noticed,  because  nothing  passed  on  it,  interesting  to  our 
mission.*  Those  of  the  bishops  whom  we  found  at  home, 
seemed  to  take  the  compliment  in  good  part,  expressed 
great  good-will  to  our  Church,  and  wished  that  our  longer 
stay,  after  their  coming  to  town,  had  permitted  their  show- 
ing of  us  attentions. f 

*  On  the  said  occasion,  we  witnessed  a  singular  ceremony,  which  we  supposed 
to  be  a  remnant  of  the  state  of  former  times.  Soon  in  the  morning,  we  had  re- 
ceived a  note  from  the  Archbishop,  intimating,  that  the  then  day  of  the  week  was 
his  public  day,  during  the  session  of  parliament;  and  that  he  should  be  glad  to  see 
us  on  any  weekly  day  so  mentioned — on  that  day  in  particular,  if  disengaged. 
We  waited  on  him,  and  supposed  from  what  we  saw,  that  the  several  eminent 
persons  who  entered  came  uninvited  as  to  that  particular  time.  Before  dinner 
the  Archbishop  rose,  bowed  to  the  company,  and  left  the  room.  They  followed, 
all  of  them,  no  doubt,  besides  ourselves,  understanding  the  transaction.  After 
passing  through  a  suite  of  rooms,  we  found  ourselves  in  the  chapel,  in  which 
were  the  two  chaplains  in  their  surplices.  One  of  them  read  the  Litany ;  after 
which,  we  returned  to  the  room  wherein  we  had  been  received.  Soon  afterward 
we  were  called  to  dinner.  It  is  probable,  that  such  a  visit  on  some  Wednesday 
— it  was  the  weekly  day — during  the  session  of  parliament,  is  expected  of  every 
member  of  either  house,  who  lives  in  habits  of  acquaintance  with  the  primate. 

The  reading  of  the  Litany,  including  the  prayers  attached  to  it  in  the  English 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  none  other,  seems  a  remnant  of  former  practice;  it 
having  been  originally  a  distinct  service.  It  is  on  this  account  that  the  incident 
has  been  related. 

t  The  prelates  whom  we  found,  were  the  Archbishop  of  York,  the  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  the  very  aged  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  in  whom  we  saw  the  wreck  of  one 


156  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

On  this  day  we  waited  pn  the  Archbishop,  in  conse- 
quence of  his  own  appointment  at  our  former  interview,  in 
order  to  accompany  him  to  Court.  Thither  we  went  to- 
gether in  his  coach.  On  being  introduced  to  the  King,  I 
made  this  preconceived  address — That  "  we  were  happy  in 
the  opportunity  of  thanking  his  Majesty,  for  his  license 
granted  to  his  Grace  the  Archbishop,  to  convey  the  Epis- 
copal succession  to  the  Church  in  America."  The  King 
made  this  answer,  which  I  set  down  to  show  the  kindness 
of  the  Archbishop* — "His  Grace  has  given  me  such  an 
account  of  the  gentlemen  who  have  come  over,  that  I  am 
glad  of  the  present  opportunity  of  serving  the  interests  of 
religion."  His  Majesty  then  asked  Dr.  Provoost,  whether 
the  Episcopal  communion  were  not  numerous  in  New  York, 
and  was  answered  by  the  Doctor  in  the  affirmative,  with 
further  thanks  for  the  license  granted.  The  King  then 
passed  to  the  next  in  the  circle,  and  after  a  little  while  we 
withdrew,  with  the  Archbishop.t 

We  had  contemplated  this  measure  of  waiting  on  the 
King  as  of  peculiar  delicacy.  In  the  character  of  citizens 
of  the  United  States  ofiAmerica,  we  should  have  thought  it 
inconsistent  in  us  to  have  made  any  application  to  the  civil 
authority  of  Great  Britain.  The  act  of  parliament  had 

of  the  first  scholars  of  the  age,  and  the  Bishops  of  Salisbury,  Bristol,  and  Ely. 
The  first  mentioned  of  these  three,  since  Bishop  of  Durham,  commended  the  mod- 
eration manifested  in  our  service  for  the  Fourth  of  July.  This  was  gratifying;  as 
it  had  been  pronounced  by  some  on  our  side  of  the  Atlantic,  that  the  said  service 
would  of  itself  be  sufficient  to  induce  a  rejection  of  the  application  of  the  American 
Church. 

•  It  may  be  presumed,  however,  that  such  civility  is  the  usual  courtesy  of  the 
place. 

t  While  we  were  waiting  in  our  places,  until  the  King  should  come  to  us  in  his 
passing  from  one  attendant  to  another,  there  occurred  an  additional  instance  of  the 
attention  of  the  Archbishop  to  the  delicacy  of  our  situation.  When  the  King 
speaks  to  you,  said  he,  you  will  only  bow;  adding,  with  a  smile — when  an  Eng- 
lish bishop  is  presented,  he  does  something  more.  This  alluded  to  the  ancient 
form  of  doing  homage  for  his  barony  on  his  knees.  We  were  aware  of  the  differ- 
ent circumstances  in  which  we  stood ;  but  it  was  considerate,  to  guard  against  the 
danger  of  mistake. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  157 

laid  on  the  Archbishop  the  obtaining  of  the  consent,  of  the 
King  under  his  sign  manual.  This  consent  had  been  ob- 
tained before  our  going  to  court;  and  therefore  we  saw  no 
impropriety  in  the  visit. 

Sunday,  February  40.     We  attended  at  the  palace  of 
Lambeth  for  consecration.     The  assistants  of  the  Arch-  C&A 
bishop  on  the  occasion,  were  the  Archbishop  of  York,  who       ]J mM 
presented;    and   the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  the    n   +  \ffi 
Bishop  of  Peterborough,  who  joined  with  the  two  Arch- 
bishops in  the  imposition  of  hands.     It  was  particularly 
agreeable  to  us,  to  see  among  them  the  Bishop  of  Bath 
and  Wells,  because  we  had  all  along  understood,  that  in 
the  beginning,  this  aged  and  venerable  prelate  had  enter- 
tained scruples  on  the  subject  of  the  application  of  our 
Church:  and  it  was  principally  owing  to  his  Lordship,  that 
such  a  point  was  made  of  the  Descent  into  Hell,  in  the  <^ 
Apostles'  Creed.     We  presumed  that  his  difficulties  were  __ 
now  removed.     Dr.  Drake,  one  of  the  Archbishop's  chap-      ,Jj*^ 
lains,   preached;    and    Dr.   Randolph,   the   other   chaplain, 

J      ^U  TU  -U1         J-  • 

read  the  prayers,      ihe  sermon  was  a  sensible  discussion 

of  the  long  litigated  subject  of  the  authority  of  the  Church, 

to  ordain  rites  and  ceremonies.     The  text  was — "  Let  all 

things  be  done  detently  and  in  order." — I    Cor.  xiv.  40. 

The  discourse  had  very  little  reference  to  the^  peculiarity  of     n.  o  o  - 

the  occasion.     The  truth  was,  as  the  Archbishop  had  told 

us  on  Friday,  on  our  way  to  court,  that  he  had  spoken  to  a 

particular  friend  to  compose  a  sermon  for  the  occasion,  and 

had  given  him  a  sketch  of  what  he  wished  to  be  the  scope 

of  it.     This  friend  had  just  sent  him  information  of  a  do- ' 

mestic  calamity,  which  would  excuse  him  from  attendance;  ) 

and  the  Archbishop  was  then  under  the  necessity  of  giving  { 

a  short  notice  to  one  of  his  chaplains. 

The  consecration  was  performed  in  the  chapel  of  the 
palace  of  the  Archbishop,  in  the  presence  of  his  family  and 
his  household,  and  X|ery  few  others;  among  whom  was  my 
eld  friend,  the  Kev7~Mr.  Duche.  I  had  asked  the  Arch- 
lishop's  leave  to  introduce  him;  and  it  was  a  great  satis- 


158  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

faction  to  me  that  he  was  there;  the  recollection  of  the 
benefit  which  I  had  received  from  his  instructions  in  early 
life,  and  a  tender  sense  of  the  attentions  which  he  had 
shown  me  almost  from  my  infancy,  together  with  the  im- 
pressions left  by  the  harmony  whichfhad  subsisted  between 
us  in  the  discharge  of  our  joint  pastoral  duty  in  Philadel- 
phia, being  no  improper  accompaniments  to  the  feelings 
suited  to  the  present  very  interesting  transaction  of  my 
life.  I  hope,  that  I  felt  the  weight  of  the  occasion.  May 
God  bless  the  meditations  and  the  recollections  by  which 
I  had  endeavored  to  prepare  myself  for  it;  and  give  them 
their  due  effect  on  my  temper  and  conduct,  in  the  new 
character  in  which  I  am  to  appear ! 

The  solemnity  being  over,  we  dined  with  the  Arch- 
bishop and  the  Bishops;  and  spent  with  them  the  remainder 
of  the  day.  I  took  occasion  to  mention  to  his  Grace  my 
conviction,  that  the  American  Church  would  be  sensible 
of  the  kindness  now  shown;  and  my  trust,  that  the  Amer- 
ican bishops,  besides  the  usual  incentives  to  duty,  would 
have  this  in  addition;  lest  the  Church  of  England  should 
have  cause  to  regret  her  act,  performed  on  this  day.  He 
answered,  that  he  fully  believed  there  would  be  no  such 
cause;  that  the  prospect  was  very  agreeable  to  him;  that 
he  bore  a  great  affection  for  our  Church;  and  that  he  should 
be  always  glad  to  hear  of  her  prosperity:  and  also  of  the 
safe  arrival  and  the  welfare  of  us  individually. 

After  spending  the  remainder  of  the  evening  very  agree- 
ably, we  took  our  leave,  which  was  affectionate  on  both 
sides;  and  on  our  part,  with  hearts  deeply  sensible  of  the 
regard  which  had  been  shown  to  our  Church,  and  of  the 
personal  civilities  which  we  had  received.* 

•  During  dinner  this  day  at  Lambeth,  we  were  surprised  at  a  conversation  intro- 
duced by  the  Bishop  of  Peterborough.  We  had  been  accustomed  to  think  it  a  sort 
of  adjunct  to  the  claim  of  churchmanship  to  consider  the  "  E.IKWV  Badihtxt/  " 
or  "  Royal  Portraiture  "  as  a  true  expression  of  the  feelings  of  King  Charles  I.  in 
some  of  the  most  trying  circumstances  of  his  life.  The  Bishop  remarked,  and  his 
brethren  assented  to  the  position,  that  the  contrary  was  now  clearly  proved,  by  a 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  159 

Monday,  February  yh.  As  an  evidence  of  his  Grace's 
delicacy,  I  deposit  the  account  of  fees,  brought  to  us  this 
morning  by  his  secretary;  and  give  the  following  narrative 
of  the  manner  in  which  that  business  was  conducted. 

On  the  morning  of  our  visit  to  court,  I  mentioned  to  the 
Archbishop,  agreeably  to  preconcert  with  Dr.  Provoost, 
that  there  must  necessarily  have  been  some  charges  for  the 
expenses  of  office,  in  carrying  the  business  of  our  Church 
through  the  civil  department;  and  requested  to  know  the 
amount,  that  we  might  discharge  it.  The  Archbishop  an- 
swered, that  if  he  should  inform  us  on  that  point,  it  must 
be  on  the  principle,  that  in  an  affair  of  no  great  magnitude, 
it  might  seem  disrespectful  to  us,  to  withhold  the  satis- 
faction demanded.  He  added,  that  on  the  occasion  of  the 
consecration  of  an  English  bishop,  there  were  very  con- 
siderable expenses  to  different  persons  of  the  Archbishop's 
court  and  of  his  household;  which  expenses  he  thought  im- 
proper on  the  present  occasion,  and  should  therefore  pro- 
hibit them.  After  the  consecration,  he,  within  our  hearing, 
informed  a  gentleman  from  Doctors'  Commons,  Robert  ( 
Jenner,  Esq.,  who  had  attended  officially  in  his  civil  law 
robe,  with  a  view  to  the  local  registry,  that  as  we  intended 
to  leave  London  the  next  day,  our  papers  must  be  ready 
in  the  morning.  On  the  gentleman's  answering,  that  he 
would  wait  on  us  with  them,  the  Archbishop  replied — No; 
you  are  to  bring  them  to  my  secretary,  who  will  wait  on 
them:  evidently  with  the  design,  that  the  pecuniary  part 
of  the  transaction  should  pass  under  his  own  control.  The 
fees  paid  by  us  jointly  amounted  to  £14  $s.  id.  being  alto- 
gether in  the  line  of  public  offices,  and  which  the  Arch- 
bishop must  h?we  paid,  but  for  the  request  made  on  our 
part. 

late  publication  of  some  papers  of  Lord  Clarendon.  These  papers,  it  was  said, 
show  the  work  to  have  been  written  by  Bishop  Gauden.  The  simplicity  of  the 
style  of  the  work,  and  the  contrary  property  said  lo  beT  discernible  in  the  writings 
of  that  Bishop,  are  the  circumstances  which  inclined  Mr.  Hume  to  give  the  credit 
of  the  composition  to  the  King. 


160  MEtfOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

For  the  instrument  of  consecration,  recorded  in  the 
archiepiscopal  registry,  see  Appendix,  No.  14. 

On  the  morning  of  the  day  of  our  leaving  of  the  city,  I 
received  a  note  from  the  Archbishop.     Although  it  begins 
with  a  message  of  civility  to  a  respectable  divine  in  New 
Jersey,  not  long  before  in  England,  I  take  the  prominent 
object  to  have  been  the  conveying  of  information,  guarding^ 
against  an   impression  which  might  have   been    made   by) 
what  had  passed  concerning  consecration  in  the  province 
of  York.     The  note  shall  be  given,  because  of  its  bearing 
on  the  question  concerning  the  number  required  for  conse- 
cration in  the  English  Church.     See  the  Appendix,  No.  15. 

There  being  in  possession  some  documents  in  the  civil 
line,  sustaining  facts  mentioned  in  the  statements,  the 
present  opportunity  is  improved  to  the  perpetuating  of 
them.  They  are, 

(1)  A  letter  from  his  Excellency  Richard  Henry  Lee, 
Esq.,  president  of  Congress,  to  his  Excellency  John  Adams, 
Esq.,  minister  plenipotentiary  to  the  court  of  Great  Britain. 

(2)  A  letter  from  Mr.  Adams  to  Mr.  Lee,  in  answer. 

(3)  A  letter  from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  Mr. 
Adams,  after  an  interview  between  them. 

(4)  A  certificate  of  the  supreme  executive  council  of 
Pennsylvania. 

(5)  A   certificate  of  his   Excellency  Governor   Patrick 
Henry,  of  Virginia. 

In  reference  to  the  last  two  documents,  and  to  a  similar 
one  in  the  case  of  Dr.  Provoost,  given  by  his  Excellency 
Governor  Clinton,  of  New  York,  but  not  in  possession,  it  is 
to  be  recollected,  that  they  were  to  be  applied  for  in  conse- 
quence of  an  instruction  of  the  General  Convention.  They 
may  reasonably  be  supposed  to  have  had  an  effect  in  ac- 
complishing the  views  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  See  the 
Appendix,  No.  16. 

It  was  in  the  statements,  that  Richard  Peters,  Esq.,  hav- 
ing visited  England  on  private  business,  was  requested  by 
the  committee  of  the  convention  to  wait  on  the  Arch- 


ADDITIONAL    S  TA  TEMENTS,  1 6 1 

bishop  of  Canterbury  on  the  business  concerning  which  the 
English  prelates  had  been  addressed.  The  consequent 
letter  of  Mr.  Peters  to  the  committee  has  a  tendency  to 
throw  light  on  the  subject,  and  is  therefore  given  in  the 
Appendix,  No.  17.* 

We  left  London  on  the  evening  of  the  5th  of  February, 
reached  Falmouth  on  the  loth,  were  detained  there  by 
contrary  winds  until  Sunday  the  i/th,  when  we  embarked, 
and  after  a  voyage  of  precisely  seven  weeks,  landed  at  New 
York  on  the  afternoon  of  Easter  Sunday,  April  the  /th; 
sensible,  I  trust,  of  the  goodness  of  God  in  our  personal 
protection  and  safety,  and  in  His  having  thus  brought  to  a 
prosperous  issue  the  measures  adopted  for  the  obtaining  of 
that  Episcopacy,  the  want  of  which  had  been  the  subject 
of  the  complaint  of  our  Church  from  the  earliest  settlement 
of  the  colonies,  and  which,  we  hope,  will  be  now  improved 
to  her  increase,  and  to  the  glory  of  her  divine  Head. 


/.     Page  30.     Of  the  Convention  in  1789. 

The  business  was  to  have  been  preceded  by  a  sermon 
from  Bishop  Provoost;  but  the  bishop  being  detained  by 
indisposition,  Dr.  Smith  preached.  The  only  bishop  present 
presided,  and  the  secretary  was  Francis  Hopkinson,  Esq.  ^  ' 

*  There  being  nothing  more  in  the  letters  to  the  committee  concerning  the 
claim  of  the  corporation  of  the  Widows'   Fund,  the  silence  seems  to  require  a 
reason.     The  abstract  was  sent  to  the  Archbishop,  agreeably  to  his  desire.     In  the 
next  interview  he  remarked,  that  he  perceived  the  evidence  of  the  promise  of  the 
society  in  England,  but  wished  to  know  to  what  period  the  society  in  America 
considered  it  as  extending.     The  author  had  not  been  informed  on  that  point  by 
the  committee,  and  made  answer  accordingly.     The  undertaking  of  the  settling 
of  this  would  have  involved  him  in  no  less  a  difficulty,  than  that  of  determining  at         / 
what  period  American  allegiance  ceased.     If  it  were  on  the  4th  of  July,   1776,        t 
there  could  be  no  claim  beyond  that  day,  on  a  fund  appropriated  by  charter  to     • 
the  dominions  of  the  British  crown.     On  the  other  hand,  to  have  dated  inde- 
pendence from  the  acknowledgment  of  it  by  Great  Britain,  would  have  been  in- 
consistent with  American  citizenship.     Accordingly,  nothing  more  passed  on  the 
subject.     It  should  be  noticed,  that  to  the  former  period  there  was  very  little  due. 


1 62  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Previously  to  the  meeting  of  the  convention,  it  was  fore- 
seen that  the  unfinished  business  of  the  Episcopacy,  and 
the  relative  situation  of  the  Church  in  Connecticut,  would 
be  the  principal  objects  of  attention,  and  must  be  thought 
important,  not  only  in  themselves,  but  because  of  the  influ- 
ence which  each  of  them  had  on  the  other.  It  may  be 
proper  to  say  something  of  these,  before  an  entry  on  the 
narrative  of  what  passed  concerning  them  in  the  convention. 

There  is  an  implication — at  least  the  author  had  always 
so  understood  it — in  the  address  to  the  English  prelates, 
that  the  American  Episcopal  Church  was  to  obtain  from 
them  the  beginning  of  the  succession  in  the  number  of 
bishops  competent,  according  to  the  English  rule  and 
practice,  to  perpetuate  it.  Doubtless  this  sentiment  was 
much  strengthened  by  the  consideration  of  the  antiquity 
and  the  expediency  of  the  rule,  which  required  the  pres- 
ence and  the  consent  of  three  bishops  in  every  conse- 
cration. Although  it  had  been  the  clear  sense  on  both 
sides,  that  the  American  Church  was  entirely  independent 
of  the  Church  of  England;  yet,  on  this  point  of  procuring 
from  England  the  canonical  number  of  bishops,  the  prom- 
ise seemed  to  have  been  voluntarily  pledged,  so  that  the 
English  prelates  might,  in  the  event  of  non-compliance,  < 
have  laid  the  charge  of  imposition.  It  is  true  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  seems  not  to  have  been  te'nacious  of 
the  canonical  number,  as  appears  from  what  he  said  of  a 
consecration  for  the  Isle  of  Man,  related  in  the  author's 
letter  from  England.*  Yet  his  Grace  was  careful  to  correct 
his  jpistake  in  regard  to  that  measure,  as  is  evident  from 
the  note  written  by  him  to  the  author,  on  the  day  on  which 
he  left  London.  If  some  of  the  Archbishop's  brethren,  of 
the  right  reverend  bench,  should  have  been  found  stricter 
than  himself  on  points  of  this  nature,  there  was  no  respon- 
sibility on  him,  and  the  blame  would  have  lain  on  those 
who  had  dispensed  with  the  ancient  number  in  America. 

•  See  ante,  p.  144.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  163 

There  may  be  acknowledged  another  reason  for  being  par- 
ticular on  this  point;  it  is  the  guarding  against  the  mis- 
chievous consequences  of  a  disposition  to  irregularity  in 
any  future  American  bishop,  who  might  have  less  con- 
cern for  the  peace  and  the  order  of  the  Church,  than  for 
the  sustaining  of  his  consequence  with  a  party.* 

In  regard  to  the  Church  in  Connecticut,  it  had  been  all 
along  an  object  with  the  author,  which  he  never  endeavored 
to  conceal,  to  bring  its  Episcopacy  within  the  union.  But 
as  the  Scotch  succession  could  not  be  officially  recognized 
by  the  English  Bishops,  he  wished  to  complete  the  succes-  f 
sion  from  England,  before  such  a  comprehension  should  -l 
take  place.  He  knew,  indeed,  that  Bishop  Provoost,  al- 
though he  did  not  appear  to  be  possessed  oTp_ersonal  ill-will 
to  Bishop  Seabury,  was  opposed  to  having  any  thing  to  do 
with  the  Scotch  succession,  which  he^  did  not  hesitate  to 
pronounce  irregular.  Yet  he  was  very  little  supported  in  • 
this  sentiment;  and  least  of  all,  by  the~cTergy  of  his  own 
diocese.  It  was  therefore  natural  to  infer,  that  he  would 
see  the  expediency  of  what  was  the  general  wish,  or  at 
least  waive  his  objection  for  the  sake  of  peace;  as  indeed 
happened.t 

Although  these  subjects  would  of  course  have  engaged 
the  attention  of  the  convention,  yet  an  application  which 
came  from  the  Church  in  Massachusetts,  addressed  to  each 

*  The  case  in  Cummings'  movement.     Ed. 

\  In  the  last  preceding  convention  of  the  Church  in  New  York,  they  had  de- 
clared their  desire,  as  well  in  favor  of  the  succession  in  the  English  line,  as  for  a 
union  of  the  Church  throughout  the  United  States,  wkh  an  evident  allusion  to  the 
Scotch  Episcopacy.  What  is  now  referred  to,  are  the  two  following  resolves, 
passed  unanimously  on  the  5th  of  November,  1788. 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  highly  necessary  in  the  opinion  of  this  convention,  that 
measures  should  be  pursued  to  preserve  the  Episcopal  succession  in  the  English 
line — and 

"Resolved  also,  That  the  union  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  is  of  great  importance  and  much  to  be  desired;  and  that 
the  delegates  of  this  state,  in  the  next  General  Convention,  be  instructed  to  pro- 
mote that  union  by  every  prudent  measure,  consistent  with  the  constitution  of  the 
Church,  and  the  continuance  of  the  Episcopal  succession  in  the  English  line." 


1 64  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

of  the  three  bishops,  and  received  by  the  author  a  few  days 
before  the  assembling  of  the  convention,  brought  the  matter 
forward  in  a  very  strong  point  of  view.  The  object  of  the 
address,  was  the  procuring  of  the  consecration  of  the  Rev. 
Edward  Bass  of  the  said  state,  as  the  concurrent  act  of  the/ 
three  bishops. 

For  the  application  from  Massachusetts,  and  for  the  tes- 
timonial of  the  consecration  of  Bishop  Seabury,  see  the 
Appendix,  No.  18. 

The  author,  had  some  time  before  written  to  Dr.  Parker, 
of  Boston,  that  he  considered  the  clergy  of  Massachusetts 
as  peculiarly  situated;  in  consequence  of  their  never  having 
been  concerned,  either  in  the  application  to  England,  or  in 
that  to  Scotland:  so  that  they  had  it  in  their  power  to  act 
the  part  of  mediators,  in  bringing  the  clergy  of  Connecticut 
and  those  of  the  other  states  together.     Dr.   Parker  has"" 
since  repeatedly  declared,  and  it  is  in  a  letter  under  his! 
Hand,  that  this  hint  was  the  origin,  and  that  the  promoting,.- 
of  the  measure  mentioned  was  the  motive,  of  the  applica-\ 
tion  for  the  consecration  of  Mr.   Bass.     Dr.  Parker,   even 
after  the  favorable  close  of  the  subsequent  session,  which 
he  had  attended,  intimated,  that  the  object  of  the  applica- 
tion having  been  accomplished,  he  and  his  brethren  would 
be  indifferent  as  to  any  thing  further.     A  confirmation  of 
this  appeared  soon  afterwards  in  the  resignation  of  Mr.  Bass.  I 

The  application  was  received  but  a  few  days  before  the 
meeting  of  the  convention,   and  very  soon   engaged  the 
notice  of  that  body,  who,  from  the  beginning,  manifested  a 
strong  desire  of  complying  with  it.     This  put  their  presi-^ 
dent  in  a  very  delicate  situation,  standing  alone  as  he  did  \ 
in  the  business,  and  as  president  of  the  assembled  body. 
Many  speeches  were  made,  which  implied,  that  the  result 
of  the  deliberation  must  involve  the  acquiescence  of  the 
two  bishops  of  the  English  line;  while  it  was  thought  by  ^ 
the  only  one  of  them  present,   that  no  determination  of  ^ 
theirs   would    warrant   the    breach    of  his   faith   impliedly  <| 
pledged,  as  he  apprehended,  in  consequence  of  measures   i 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  165 

taken  by  a  preceding  convention.  Accordingly,  he  took 
occasion  to  state  to  several  of  the  members,  in  the  intervals 
of  the  meetings,  the  difficulty  under  which  he  lay.  They 
urged  the  necessity,  which  they  thought  the  Church  was 
under,  and  as  to  the  implication  involved  in  the  first  address 
to  the  English  bishops,  they  said  it  was  intended  at  the 
time,  but  prevented  by  unexpected  occurrences  in  the  case 
of  Dr.  Griffith.  On  the  opposite  side,  no  such  necessity 
was  perceived;  and  as  to  the  resignation  of  Dr.  Griffith, 
another  might  be  chosen.  He  had  been  himself  chosen 
after  the  date  of  the  letter  to  the  English  bishops.  The 
issue  of  these  conferences,  were  the  resolves  on  the  journal 
of  this  session,  with  a  reference  to  the  difficulty  stated,  and 
the  directing  of  an  address  to  the  English  prelates;  which 
was  accordingly  drawn  up,  as  it  stands  on  the  journal  of 
the  next  session. 

For  the  resolves  and  the  address  to  the  Archbishops, 
see  the  Appendix,  No.  19. 

The  author,  on  being  consulted  in  regard  to  this  expe- 
dient, saw  an  objection  to  it  in  the  call  which  it  made  on 
the  said  prelates,  to  declare  an  opinion  on  the  subject  of 
the  Scotch  Episcopacy.  Perhaps  they  might  not  agree. 
Even  if  their  opinion  should  be  favorable,  it  must  be  in 
opposition  to  the  positive  provisions  of  acts  of  parliament, 
and  therefore  would  not  be  officially  given.  For  his  part, 
the  only  way  in  which  he  was  to  be  affected  by  the  meas- 
ure in  contemplation  was  the  being  relieved  at  the  present 
time,  from  the  pain  of  standing  opposed  to  the  wishes  of 
the  convention. 

The  measure  was  adopted;  and  this  seems  the  proper 
place  of  mentioning  the  result  of  it.  When  Bishop  Madi- 
son went  to  England,  in  the  following  summer,  for  conse- 
cration, the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  informed  him,  and 
desired  him  to  inform  the  author,  as  president  of  the  con- 
vention, that  he  (the  Archbishop)  had  drawn  up  an  answer, 
the  sending  of  which  would  be  rendered  unnecessary  by 
his  (Bishop  Madison's)  coming.  The  Archbishop  read  the 


1 66  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

answer  to  him;  remarking,  that  it  was  painful  to  him  to  be 
in  such  circumstances,  as  required  him  to  speak  or  write  in 
terms  which  were  not  an  explicit  declaration  on  the  sub- 
ject. In  short,  Bishop  Madison  said,  that  the  Archbishop, 
in  the  answer,  left  the  matter  as  he  found  it:  which  was 
what  might  have  been  expected  from  the  caution  of  his 
character,  and  from  the  circumstances  of -peculiar  delicacy 
attending  this  subject.* 

That  so  little  business  was  transacted  in  this  session  of 
the  convention,  may  be  seen  from  the  journal  to  have  been 
owing  to  the  adjournment,  made  for  the  express  purpose  of 
inviting  the  clergy  of  Connecticut  to  meet  the  convention 
in  September;  an  object  which  it  was  expected  would  be 
promoted  by  the  conviction  generally  prevailing  in  the 
convention,  that  the  formerly  proposed  constitution  was 
inadequate  to  the  situation  of  this  Church,  and  by  the  new 
constitution  entered  on  the  journal  of  this  session.  On  this 
business,  the  president  of  the  convention  met  the  commit- 
tee but  once,  and  interested  himself  very  little;  being  de- 
sirous, that  whatever  additional  powers  it  might  i>e  thought 
necessary  to  assign  to  the  bishops,  such  powrers  should  not 
lie  under  the  reproach  of  having  been  pressed  for  by  one 
of  the  number,  but  be  the  result  of  due  deliberation,  and 


•  *  In  an  interview  with  the  Archbishop,  he  expressed  himself  to  Bishop  Madison 
to  the  following  effect,  as  appears  from  a  communication  of  the  latter  to  the  author, 
dated  December  19,  1790:  from  which  the  other  particulars  are  also  taken — "A 
few  days  before  I  left  London,  the  Archbishop  requested  a  particular  interview 
with  me.  He  said,  he  wished  to  express  his  hopes,  and  also  to  recommend  it  to 
our  Church,  that  in  such  consecrations  as  might  take  place  in  America,  the  per- 
sons who  had  received  their  powers  from  the  Church  of  England  should  be  alone 
concerned.  He  sjx>ke  with  great  delicacy  of  Dr.  Seabury;  but  thought  it  most 
advisable,  that  the  line  of  bishops  should  be  handed  down  from  those  who  had  re- 
ceived their  commission  from  the  same  source." 

It  was  afterwards  supposed,  that  the  sense  of  the  Archbishop  was  fully  accom- 
plished by  the  presence  and  the  assistance  of  the  canonical  number  of  the  English 
line;  and  the  matter  was  so  understood  by  Bishop  Madison.     Besides,  the  ques-S 
tion  had  changed  itsground,  by  the  repeal  of  the  lays  against  the  Scottish  bishops;  I 
and  by  their  reception,  in  their  proper  character,  in  England.     This  happened  after  / 
Bishop  Madison's  visit  to  that  country. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  167 

the  free  choice  of  all  orders  of  persons  within  the  Church, 
and  given  with  a  view  to  her  good  government.* 

In  the  second  session,  the  clergy  who  came  from  the 
eastward,  besides  Bishop  Seabury,  were  two  of  his  presby- 
ters, Mr.  Hubbard  and  Mr.  Jarvis,  from  Connecticut;  and 
Dr.  Parker,  from  Massachusetts.  All  things  now  appeared 
to  tend  to  a  happy  union. 

But  a  danger  arose  from  an  unexpected  question,  on  the 
very  day  of  the  arrival  of  these  gentlemen.     The  danger   ( 
was  on  the  score^of  politics.     Some  lay  members  of  the 
convention — two  of  them  were  known,  and  perhaps  there 


*  During  the  session  there  took  place  in  the  house  of  the  author,  the  decease 
of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Griffith,  of  Virginia.  The  respect  entertained  for  him  by  the  con- 
vention appears  in  the  arrangements  made  for  attendance  on  his  funeral  as  re- 
corded on  the  journal.  He  had  been  much  indisposed  from  the  day  of  his  arrival. 
His  death,  however,  was  in  one  sense  sudden,  and  certainly  unexpected  to  the 
very  able  physician  who  attended  him,  and  with  whom  he  had  been  in  long  habits 
of  acquaintance.  His  disorder  was  the  inflammatory  rheumatism,  which  passed 
to  his  head  during  sleep.  The  following  statement  is  thought  due  to  the  memory 
of  a  respectable  divine,  who  had  manifested  great  zeal  for  the  organizing  of  the 
Church. 

It  has  been  reported,  and  had  weight  on  some  minds  in  a  more  recent  election 
to  the  Episcopacy,  that  he  had  been  under  the  necessity  of  resigning,  on  account 
of  his  having  been  elected  in  haste,  and  without  due  notice.  The  contrary  is  here 
known,  and  can  be  proved  by  documents  in  possession.  His  election  was  in  May, 
1786.  Some  private  concerns,  and  the  notjjeing  supplied  with  money,  prevented 
his  crossing  the  Atlantic  with  the  two  who  crossed  it  in  November  of  that  year. 
In  May,  1787,  about  a  year  after  his  election,  and  about  a  month  after  the  return 
of  the  bishops  consecrated  in  England,  there  was  held  a  convention  in  Virginia, 
from  the  printed  journal  of  which  the  following  is  an  extract : — 

"  Resolved,  That  the  standing  committee,  without  delay,  request  of  the  Right 
Rev.  Dr.  White,  bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  commonwealth 
of  Pennsylvania,  and  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Proyoost,  bishop  of  the  said  Church  in 
the  State  of  New  York,  that  they,  or  either  of  them,  admit  to  consecration  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Griffith,  nominated  by  the  last  convention  bishop  of  the  Church  in  this 
state." 

The  standing  committee  were  the  Rev.  Dr.  Madison,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bracken, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Shield,  the  Hon.  John  Blair,  Mr.  Page,  of  Rosewell,  and  Mr.  An- 
drews. The  prominent  applicant  to  the  American  bishops  was  Dr.  Madison,  who 
was  afterwards  bishop.  The  principle  on  which  the  bishops  declined  compliance, 
has  been  set  forth  in  its  proper  place ;  being  their  opinion,  that  they  were  jrtedged 
to  their  first  obtaining  of  three  bishops  from  England. 


1 68  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

were  more,  having  obtained  information  that  Bishop  Sea- 
bury,  who  had  been  chaplain  to  a  British  regiment  during 
the  war,  was  now  in  the  receipt  of  half-pay,  entertained 
scruples  in  regard  to  the  propriety  of  admitting  him  as  a 
member  of  the  convention.  One  of  the  gentlemen  took 
the  author  aside,  at  a  gentleman's  house  where  several  of 
the  convention  were  dining,  and  stated  to  him  this  diffi- 
culty. His  opinion — it  is  hoped  the  right  one — was,  that 
an  ecclesiastical  body  needed  not  to  be  over  righteous,  or 
more  so  than  civil  bodies,  on  such  a  point — that  he  knew 
of  no  law  of  the  land,  which  the  circumstance  relative  to  a 
former  chaplaincy  contradicted — that  indeed  there  was  an 
article  in  the  confederation,  then  the  bond  of  union  of  the 
states,  providing  that  no  citizen  of  theirs  should  receive 
any  title  of  nobility  from  a  foreign  power;  a  provision  not 
extending  to  the  receipt  of  money;  which  seemed  impliedly 
allowed,  indeed,  in  the  guard  provided  against  the  other — 
that  Bishop  Seabury's  half-pay  was  a  compensation  for  for- 
mer services,  and  not  for  any  now  expected  of  him — that 
it  did  not  prevent  his  being  a  citizen,  with  all  the  rights  at- 
tached to  the  character,  in  Connecticut — and  that  should 
he  or  any  person  in  the  like  circumstances  be  returned  a 
member  of  Congress  from  that  state,  he  must  necessarily 
be  admitted  of  their  body.  The  gentleman  to  whom  the 
reasoning  was  addressed,  seemed  satisfied,  and  either  from 
this  or  from  some  other  cause,  the  objection  was  not 
brought  forward.  The  author  very  much  apprehended, 
that  the  contrary  would  happen,  not  because  of  the  pre- 
judices of  the  gentleman  who  addressed  him  on  the  sub- 
ject, but  because  of  those  of  another,  who  had  started  the 
difficulty. 

On  the  day  succeeding  that  of  the  above  conversation, 
the  committee  was  appointed,  as  stated  on  the  minutes,  to 
confer  with  the  eastern  gentlemen,  on  a  plan  of  union. 
They  met  in  the  evening,  and  found  no  difficulty  in  joining 
in  the  report,  as  made  the  next  day  in  the  convention.  The 
subsequent  adoption  of  the  report,  with  the  reservation 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  169 

as  to  the  negative  of  the  bishops,  leads  to  the  remark, 
that  from  the  sentiments  expressed  in  the  debate,  there  is 
reason  to  believe  that  the  full  negative  would  have  been 
allowed,  had  not  Mr.  Andrews,  from  Virginia,  very  seri- 
ously, and  doubtless  very  sincerely,  expressed  his  appre- 
hension, that  it  was  so  far  beyond  what  was  expected  by 
the  Church  in  his  state,  as  would  cause  the  measure  to  be 
there  disowned.  The  desire  that  Mr.  Andrews  had  all 
along  shown  to  effect  the  union,  and  the  good  temper  with 
which  he  had  treated  every  subject  of  discussion,  gave  the 
greater  force  to  his  apprehensions:  the  consequence  of 
which  was,  the  referring  of  the  subject  of  the  full  negative 
to  some  subsequent  General  Convention,  to  be  determined 
according  to  instructions  from  the  conventions  in  the  several 
states.  The  eastern  gentlemen~acquiesced,  but  reluctantly, 
in  this  compromise.  Had  there  been  no  more  than  their 
apprehension  of  laws  passing  by  a  majority  of  four  fifths, 
after  a  non-concurrence  of  the  bishops,  the  extreme  im- 
probability of  this  would — it  is  thought — have  been  con- 
fessed by  them.  But  the  truth  is — they  thought  that  the 
frame  of  ecclesiastical  government  could  hardly  be  called 
Episcopal,  while  such  a  matter  was  held  out  as  specula- 
tively  possible.* 

For  the  constitution  as  proposed  by  the  session  of  July 


*  The  case  of  Mr.  Andrews,  of  Virginia,  is  a  strong  proof  of  the  laxity  in  regard 
to  due  order  and  discipline,  under  which  it  was  necessary  to  begin  the  organization 
of  the  Church.     He  was  a  first  cousin  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Andrews,  with  whom  and 
with  the  author  he  had  been  a  student  in  the  college  of  Philadelphia.     At  the  time 
in  question,  he  was  a  professor  in  the  college  of  Williamsburg,  in  Virginia.     Al- 
though in  priest's  orders,  he  had  discontinued  his  ministry,  and  acted  in  some  civil 
employments  of  responsibility,  with  reputation.     He  was  a  very  sensible  and  a 
very  amiable  man,  in  his  temper  and  deportment.     He  had,  doubtless,  in  some 
way  reconciled  his  departure  from  the  clerical  character  with  a  sincere  desire  of 
settling  the  concerns  of  the  Church,  and  of  contributing  his  best  endeavors  to  that 
effect.     Certain  it  is,  that  they  were  directed,  not  to  the  pulling  down,  but  to  the  v 
building  up  of  the  Church,  the  ministry  of  which  he  had  forsaken.     Probably  he  *) 
was  the  easier  reconciled  to  this  measure,  by  the  almost  total  prostration  of  the  / 
Church  in  Virginia  during  the  war  of  the  revolution. 


170  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

and  August,  and  as  acceded  to  in  this  session  by  Bishop 
Seabury  and  the  presbyters  from  Connecticut  and  Boston, 
see  the  Appendix,  No.  20. 

No  Sooner  had  the  convention  divided  into  two  houses,  I 
than  an  incident  happened  in  the   House  of  Clerical  and*->. 
Lay  Deputies,  which  had  an  unpropitious  influence  on  all  ) 
that  followed ;  and  as  the  result  of  the  deliberations  of  bothj 
houses  was,  in  many  points,  owing  to  this  incident,  occa-\ 
sion  is  taken  to  relate  it,  on  recollection,  after  having  been  \ 
a  hearer  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  at  the  / 
time. 

In  the  appointment  of  committees  on  the  different  de- 
partments of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  Dr.  Parker  pro- 
posed that  the  English  book  should  be  the  ground  of  the  • 
proceedings  held,  without  any  reference  to  that  set  out  and  f 
proposed  in  178$.     This  was  objected  to  by  some,  who  con-       -j4     *  / 

/_  tended,  that  a  liturgy  ought  to  be  formed,  withojat  reference  ()  /hA*J 
to  any  existing  book,  although  with  liberty  to  take  from/\ 
any,  whatever  the  convention  should  think  fit.     The  issue L 
of  the  debate,  was  the  wording  of  the  resolves  as  they  stand 
on  the  journal,  in  which  the  different  committees  are  ap- 
j,   pointed,  to  prepare  a  morning  and  evening  prayer — to  pj^- 
pare  a  litany — to  prepare  a  communion  service— and  the  t 
same,  in  regard  to  the  other  departments,  instead  of  its  be- 
ing said — to  aher  the  said  services;  which  had  been  the  '  6 
language  in  1785.  f      / 

This  was  very  unreasonable;  because  the  different  con- /.-^^  Q^wti 
gregations  of  the  Church  were  always  understood  to  be  pos- 
sessed of  a  liturgy,  before  the  consecration  of  her  bishops, 


or  the  existence  of  her  conventions.     It  would  have  been  _ 
thought  a  strange  doctrine  in  any  of  the  clergy,  had  they  jj,, 
pretended  that  they  were  released  from  all  obligation  to  the  • 
use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  by  the  revolution.     It  v\ 
is  true,  that  Dr.  Parker  had  carried  the  matter  too  far,  in-A 
speaking  of  the  Proposed   Book,  as  a  form  of  which  they 
couldjcjvpw  nothing,  considering  that  it  had  been  proposed  >vtvxfwv»r 
by  a  preceding  convention  from  a  majority  of  the  states. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  171 

It  was  particularly  wondered  at  in  Dr.  Parker,  by  those 
who  knew  that  he  had  used  the  book  in  his  own  church  at 
Boston.  But  as  the  Doctor,  during  the  preceding  part  of 
the  session,  had  been  looked  to  for  the  opening  of  the  sen- 
timents of  the  clergy  present  from  Connecticut,  who  had 
said  but  little  all  along,  and  evidently  depended  on  him,  to 
press  the  points  which  they  had  most  at  heart,  it  is  proba- 
ble, that  in  this  instance,  he  accommodated  more  than  was 
either  necessary  or  well  considered,  to  make  matters  agree- 
able to  their  minds.  The  direct  course  would  have  been, 
to  have  taken  the  English  liturgy,  as  that  in  which  some 
alterations  were  contemplated;  and  with  it,  the  other  as  a 
proposal,  agreeably  to  what  was  expressed  in  the  title  page. 
Certain  it  is,  that  the  extreme  proposed  tended  very  much 
to  the  opposite  extreme,  which  took  effect — an  evident  im- 
plication in  all  the  proceedings  of  the  house,  that  there 
were  no  forms  of  prayer,  no  offices,  and  no  rubrics,  until 
they  should  be  formed  by  the  convention  now  assembled. 
Every  one  must  perceive,  that  this  abridged  the  species  of 
negative,  lodged  with  the  House  of  Bishops.  For  if,  in  any 
branch  of  the  liturgy,  they  should  be  disposed  to  be  tena- 
cious in  any  point,  which  should  be  a  deviation  from  the 
English  book,  the  consequence  must  be,  not  that  the  prayer, 
or  whatever  else  it  were,  remained  as  before,  but  that  no 
such  matter  were  to  be  inserted.  This,  in  some  instances, 
would  have  operated  to  the  extent  of  excluding  a  whole 
office  of  the  .Church,  if  the  negative  of  the  bishops  had  been 
insisted  on.  They  did  not  carry  their  right  so  far,  but  they 
reasoned  and  expostulated  on  the  point,  with  several  of  the 
gentlemen,  to  no  purpose.  They  would  not  allow  that 
there  was  any  book  of  authority  in  existence:  a  mode  of 
proceeding,  in  which  they  have  acted  differently  from  the 
conventions  before  and  after  them:  who  have  recognized 
the  contrary  principle  when  any  matter  occurred  to  which 
it  was  applicable.  If  that  adopted  by  the  majority  of  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  had  been  acted  on  by 
the  clergy  and  by  the  individual  congregations,  on  the 


172  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

taking  place  of  the  civil  revolution,  it  would  have  torn  the 
Church  to  pieces.  On  the  contrary,  the  idea  had  prevailed, ' 
that  although  the  civil  part  of  the  institution  was  destroyed, 
and  each  Christian  minister  lay  under  the  necessity  to  dis- 
charge the  Scriptural  duty  of  praying  for  his  civil  rulers  ac- 
cording to  his  individual  discretion;  the  rest  of  the  service 
remained  entire,  on  the  ground  of  antecedent  obligation. 

The  forms  of  proceeding  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  con- 
sisting of  two  only — Bishop  Provoost,  although  absent, 
being  considered  as  making  up  the  constitutional  number — 
were  soon  settled.  They  were  drafted  by  the  author,  and 
he  seized  the  opportunity  of  preventing  all  discussions  at 
any  time — for  this  he  hoped  for  as  the  effect — on  the  point 
I  of  precedency,  by  resting  the  matter  on  the  seniority  of 
!  Episcopal  consecration:  which,  of  course,  made  Bishop 
Seabury  the  president  of  the  house.  This  regulation  was  I 
agreeable  to  the  judgment  of  the  author;  which  is  not  | 
altered,  although  a  different  principle  was  adopted  at  the 
next  convention,  and  acted  on  for  a  time.  The  only  plau-  ' 
sible  objection  heard  to  the  other — which,  however,  lies 
equally  against  that  afterward  adopted — is  the  possible 
case  of  the  presidency's  devolving  on  a  bishop,  who  may 
be  disqualified  for  the  duties  of  it,  by  mental  or  by  bodily 
infirmities.  But  in  this  case,  a  vice-president,  or  a  presi- 
dent pro  tempore,  might  be  appointed. 

The  principal  act  of  this  session  was  the  preparing  of 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  now  the  established  Liturgy 
of  the  Church.     It  will  not  be  noticed  any  further,  than, 
on  the  ground  of  information  possessed,  to  account  for  the 
doing  or  for  the  omitting  of  any  important  matter.     The^ 
journal  shows,  that  some  parts  of  it  were  drawn  up  bys 
the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  and  other  parts  / 
of  it  by  the  House  of  Bishops.     In  the  latter,  owing  to  the\ 
smallness  of  the  number  and  a  disposition  in  both  of  them 
to  accommodate,  business  was  despatched  with  great  ce- 
lerity; as  must  be  seen  by  any  one  who  attends  to  the 
progress  of  the  subjects  recorded  on  the  journal.     To  this 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  173 

day,  there  are  recollected  with  satisfaction,  the  hours  which 
were  spent  with  Bishop  Seabury  on  the  important  subjects 
which  came  before  them;  and  especially  the  Christian  tem- 
per which  he  manifested  all  along. 

In  the  daily  prayer  for  morning  and  evening  service; 
the  principal  subjects  of  difference  arising  between  the  two 
houses,  were  the  Athanasian  Creed,  and  the  Descent  into  5 
Hell  in  the  Apostles'CreedT~ 

~~Dn  the  former  subject,  the  author  consented  to  the  pro- 
posal of  Bishop  Seabury,  of  making  it  an  amendment  to 
the  draft  sent  by  the  other  house;   to  be  inserted  with  a 
rubric,   permitting  the  use  of  it.     This  however  was  de- 
clared to  be  on  the  principle  of  accommodation,  to  the  many 
who  were  reported  to  desire  it,  especially  in  Connecticut;  /  . 
where,   it  was  said,  the  omitting  of  it  would  hazard  the 
reception  of  the  book.     It  was  the  author's  intention  never  T 
to  read  the  creed  himself,  and  he  declared  his  mind  to  that  j 
effect.    Bishop  Seabury,  on  the  contrary,  thought  that  with- 
out it,  there  would  be  a  difficulty  in  keeping  out  of  the  • 
Church  the  errors  to  which  it  stands  opposed.     In  answer 
to  this,  there  were  urged  the  instances  of  several  churches, 
as  the  Lutheran  and  others  in  this  country  and  in  Europe; 
and  above  all,  the  instance  of  the  widely  extended  Greek  V 
Church,  confessedly  tenacious  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Nicene 
Creed,  and  yet  not  possessed  of  the  Athanasian  in   any  J 
liturgy,  or  even  of  an  acknowledgment  of  it  in  any  confes-/ 
sion  of  faith.     Of  the  last  mentioned  instance,  Bishop  Sea- 
bury  entertained  a  doubt:  but  the  fact  is  certainly  so;  as  is 
attested  by  the  Rev.  John  Smith,  an  English  divine  held  in 
estimation,  who  wrote  "an  account  of  the  Greek  Church," 
with  the  advantage  of  having  resided  in  Constantinople. 
He  says  (p.  196)  after  mention  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  and 
the  Nicene — "  as  to  that  of  St.  Athanasius,  they  are  wholly  / 
strangers  to  it."     However,  the  creed  was  inserted  by  way  / 
of  amendment;  to  be  used  or  omitted  at  discretion.     But 
the  amendment  was  negatived  by  the  other  house:   and 
when  the  subject  afterward  came   up  in  conference  they 


174  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

would  not  allow  of  the  creed  in  any  shape;  which  was 
thought  intolerant  by  the  gentlemen  from  New  England, 
who,  with  Bishop  Seabury,  gave  it  up  with  great  reluctance. 
The  other  subject — the  Descent  of  Christ  into  Hell — 
was  left  in  a  situation,  which  afterwards  not  a  little  embar- 
rassed the  committee  who  had  the  charge  of  printing  the 
book.  The  amendments  of  the  bishops,  whether  verbal  or 
otherwyie,  to  the  services  sent  to  the  other  house,  had  all 
been  numbered.  The  president  of  that  house,  as  afterward 
appeared  on  unquestionable  verbal  testimony,  accidentally 
omitted  the  reading  of  the  article  in  its  full  force,  with  the 
explanatory  rubric.  The  meaning  of  the  article  in  that 
place,  was  declared  to  be  the  statejrf  Jjie  dead,  g^n^raUy: 
and  this  was  proposed,  instead  of  the  form  in  which  the 
other  house  had  presented  it,  in  italics  and  between  hooks, 
with  a  rubric  permitting  the  use  of  the  words — "  He  went 
into  the  place  of  departed  spirits."  The  paper  of  the  house, 
in  return  to  that  of  the  bishops,  said  nothing  on  this  head; 
and  therefore  their  acquiescence  was  presumed.  This  might 
have  been  the  easier  supposed,  as  there  were  some,  who, 
while  they  thought  but  little  of  the  importance  of  inserting 
such  an  article,  were  yet  of  opinion,  that  the  convention 
stood  pledged,  on  the  present  subject,  to  the  English  bish- 
ops: it  being  the  only  one  on  which  they  had  laid  much 
stress,  in  stating  the  terms  on  which  they  were  willing  to 
consecrate  for  our  Church;  and  we  having  complied  with 
their  wishes,  in  that  respect.  This  would  seem  very  un- 
suitably followed  by  a  repetition  of  the  offensive  measure, 
or  something  very  like  it,  in  the  first  convention  held  after 
the  consecration  had  been  obtained.  Thus,  the  matter 
passed  without  further  notice.  But  Bishop  Seabury,  before 
he  left  the  city,  conceived  a  suspicion  that  there  had  been 
a  misunderstanding.  For,  on  the  evening  before  his  de- 
parture, he  took  the  author  aside  from  company,  and  men- 
tioned his  apprehension;  which  was  treated  as  groundless, 
on  the  full  belief  that  it  was  so.  It  was  a  point  which 
Bishop  Seabury  had  much  at  heart,  from  an  opinion,  that 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  175 

the  article  was  put  into  the  creed,  in  opposition  to  the 
Apollinarian  heresy,  and  that,  therefore,  the  withdrawing 
of  it  was  an  indirect  encouragement  of  the  same.  The 
author  saw  no  such  inference;  but  wished  to  retain  the 
article,  on  the  ground,  that  the  doing  so  would  tend  to 
peace;  that  it  would  be  acting  consistently  towards  the 
English  Church;  and  that  a  latitude  would  be  left  by  the 
proposed  rubric  for  the  understanding  of  the  article  as 
referring  to  the  state  of  departed  spirits  generally.  It  is 
curious  to  remark,  by  the  way,  that  when  the  book  came 
out,  Bishop  Provoost  disliked  the  form  in  which  this  part 
of  it  appeared,  more  than  either  the  article  as  it  stood 
originally,  or  the  omitting  of  it  altogether:  on  the  princi-^ 
pie  that  it  exacted  a  belief  of  the  existence  of  departed  \ 
spirits,  between  death  and  the  resurrection.  So  easy  is  it, 
in  extending  latitude  of  sentiment  on  one  side,  to  limit  it 
on  another. 

However,  when  the  committee  assembled  to  prepare  the 
book  for  the  press,  great  was  their  surprise  and  that  of  the  . 
author,  to  find  that  the  two  houses  had  misunderstood  one 
another  altogether.  The  question  was — what  is  to  be  done  ? 
And  here,  the  different  principles  on  which  the  business 
had  been  conducted,  had  their  respective  operation.  The 
committee  contended,  that  the  amendment  made  by  the 
bishops  to  the  service  as  proposed  by  their  house,  not  ap- 
pearing to  have  been  presented,  the  service  must  stand  as 
proposed  by  them,  with  the  words  "he  descended  into 
hell,"  printed  in  italics  and  between  hooks;  and  with  the 
rubric  permissory  of  the  use  of  the  words — "he  went  into 
the  place  of  departed  spirits."  On  the  contrary,  it  was 
thought  a  duty  to  maintain  the  principle,  that  the  Creed, 
as  in  the  English  book,  must  be  considered  as  the  Creed  of 
the  Church,  until  altered  by  the  consent  of  both  houses; 
which  was  not  yet  done.  Accordingly,  remonstrance  was 
made  against  the  printing  of  the  article  of  the  Descent  into 
Hell,  in  the  manner  in  which  it  appears  in  the  book  pub-- 
lished  at  the  time. 


176  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCff. 

When  the  convention  afterwards  met  in  New  York,  in 
ri  the  year  1792,  this  matter  came  in  review  before  them:  and 
the  result  was  the  ordering  of  the  Creed  to  be  printed  in  all 
future  editions,  with  the  article  not  in  italics  and  between 
hooks  as  before,  but  with  the  rubric  leaving  it  to  discretion 
to  use  or  to  omit  it;  or  to  use,  instead  of  it,  the  words  con- 
sidered by  the  rubric  as  synonymous.  Some  such  compo- 
sition seemed  to  be  rendered  absolutely  necessary  by  exist- 
ing circumstances. 

The  importance  given  to  this  article  by  the  requisition 
of  the  English  prelates,  and  the  litigation  which  it  has  con- 
sequently undergone  in  our  conventions,  induce  the  being 
particular  in  regard  to  it.  Therefore,  as  the  delivery  of 
opinion  on  the  subject  will  fall  within  the  design  of  these 
sheets,  it  is  proposed  to  recur  to  it  again,  before  the  finish- 
ing of  remarks  on  the  transactions  of  this  convention. 

As  connected  with  the  morning  and  evening  prayers,  the 
reading  Psalms  come  under  notice  in  this  place,  and  the 
following  information  is  to  be  given  concerning  them. 

The  House  of  Bishops  did  not  approve  of  the  expedient 
of  the  other  house,  in  relation  to  the  selections  as  they  now 
I  stand,  to  be  used  at  the  discretion  of  the  minister,  instead 
of  the  Psalms  for  the  day.  But  Bishop  Seabury  interested 
himself  in  the  subject  the  less,  as  knowing,  that  neither 
himself  nor  any  of  his  clergy  would  make  use  of  the  alter- 
native, but  that  they  would  adhere  to  the  old  practice.  For 
the  author's  part,  he  disliked  the  course  taken,  from  the 
opinion,  that  it  was  less  likely  to  be  satisfactory  than  an- 
other expedient  suggested  by  him,  for  the  improving  of  this 
part  of  the  service,  which,  in  his  opinion,  called  for  it  more 
than  any  other.  The  expedient,  was  to  give  to  the  offici- 
ating minister  the  liberty  to  select  Psalms  at  his  discretion. 
This  would  be  attended — he  thought — with  the  advantage 
of  breaking  the  practice  of  reading  the  Psalms,  without  any 
regard  to  their  suitableness  to  the  general  circumstances 
and  state  of  mind  of  a  mixed  congregation,  and  yet,  not 
hazard  such  capricious  omissions  of  particular  passages  as 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  177 

might  be  construed  by  some  into  a  disrespectful  treatment 
of  Holy  Writ,  and  thus  prevent  all  improvement  in  this 
branch  of  the  service.  Another  consequence  would  be, 
that,  the  number  and  the  length  of  the  Psalms  depending 
on  the  choice  of  the  minister,  there  would  be  great  encour- 
agement to  the  introduction  of  the  practice  of  singing  this 
part  of  the  service,  instead  of  repeating  the  verses  by  the 
minister  and  the  clerk  alternately.  As  to  the  selection 
made,  he  considers  some  of  the  omissions  of  particular 
verses  as  very  capricious,  and  the  selections  in  general  as 
having  added  to  the  length  of  the  morning  and  evening 
prayer,  instead  of  shortening  them;  an  object  confessedly 
proper  to  be  kept  in  view.  They  were  indeed  made  with 
too  little  deliberation;  of  which  there  needs  not  to  be  given 
any  stronger  proof,  than  that  the  selections  which  stand  as 
the  seventh  and  the  eighth  were  proposed  by  the  House  of 
Bishops,  at  his  desire,  as  an  amendment.  The  excellency 
of  the  Psalms  overlooked  by  gentlemen  of  judgment  and 
taste,  is  a  proof,  that  the  time  and  the  care  bestowed  on 
the  work  were  not  proportioned  to  its  importance.  The 
proposal  for  the  inserting  of  them,  was  owing  to  the  desire 
of  having  the  printed  selections,  since  there  were  to  be 
such,  to  contain  as  many  of  the  Psalms  as  were  suited  to 
the  ordinary  devotions  of  a  congregation.  The  selections 
which  the  bishops  made  contained  whole  Psalms,  on  the 
principle  already  stated.  The  other  house  accepted  them 
as  sent;  only  that  they  excluded  one  verse  from  the  eighty- 
fourth  Psalm.  But  this  subject  has  been  spoken  to  more 
particularly  in  a  former  department  of  the  present  work.* 

There  has  been  already  expressed  the  opinion,  that  this 
part  of  the  service  requires  improvement,  as  much  as  any. 
The  author  earnestly  wishes  to  see  the  time  when  it  may 
be  established  on  the  principles  of  rational  piety  and  good 
taste.  But  there  are  great  difficulties  in  the  way.  On  the 
one  hand  there  are  very  many  who  remain  attached  to 

*  Ante,  p.  122.     Ed. 


178  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  old  practice  of  reading  all  the  Psalms,  according  to  the 
daily  arrangement.  Against  this,  besides  the  objection  so 
often  made,  that  some  of  them  have  more  of  the  severity 
of  the  legal  than  of  the  mercy  of  the  evangelical  dispensa- 
tion, there  is  the  circumstance,  that  a  very  great  proportion 
of  these  compositions  are  expressive  of  peculiar  states  of 
mind,  no  one  of  which  can  be  supposed  descriptive  of  any 
body  of  people,  convened  on  a  common  occasion  of  devo- 
tion. Accordingly,  the  parts  referred  to  seem  to  be  not 
suited  to  such  an  occasion,  however  admirably  they  may 
be  so  for  the  private  prayer  and  thanksgiving  of  particular 
persons.  As  to  the  plea  of  antiquity,  little  stress  is  to  be 
laid  on  it,  unless  it  could  be  proved,  that  the  Psalms  were 
so  used  in  the  earliest  ages  of  the  Church,  the  contrary  to 
which  is  here  taken  to  be  the  fact. 

But  although  these  objections  lie,  as  is  conceived, 
against  the  past  practice,  there  is  such  a  propensity  man- 
ifested to  the  extreme  of  hypercriticism,  as  is  calculated  to 
bring  reproach  on  every  temperate  reform  of  this  part  of 
the  service.  The  selections  in  the  present  Prayer  Book, 
had  they  consisted  of  entire  Psalms,  would  have  been  much 
more  generally  used  than  they  are  at  present.  In  saying 
this,  it  is  not  intended  to  object  to  collections  of  verses, 
made  with  a  professed  reference  to  particular  subjects;  a 
beautiful  instance  of  which — it  is  spoken  of  as  a  mere 
matter  of  taste — is  in  the  English  Prayer  Book,  in  the 
hymn  in  the  3<Dth  of  January  service,  to  be  used  instead  of 
the  "Venite."  But  it  is  wished  to  distinguish  between  a 
selection  made  with  a  reference  to  a  particular  subject,  and 
rejection  on  a  supposed  unfitness  for  any  act  of  Christian 
devotion. 

In  the  service  for  the  administration  of  the  communion, 
it  may  perhaps  be  expected,  that  the  great  change  made, 
in  restoring  to  the  consecration  prayer  the  objjatorywpjds 
and  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  lettout  in  King 
Edward's  reign,  must  at  least  have  produced  an  opposition. 
But  no  such  thing  happened  to  any  considerable  extent, 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  179 

or  at  least,  the  author  did  not  hear  of  any  in  the  other 
house,  further  than  a  disposition  to  the  effect  in  a  few 
gentlemen,  which  was  counteracted  by  some  pertinent 
remarks  of  the  president.  In  that  of  the  bishops,  it  lay 
very  near  to  the  heart  of  Bishop  Seabury.  As  for  the 
other  bishop,  without  conceiving  with  some,  that  the  ser- 
vice as  it  stood  was  essentially  defective,  he  always  thought 
there  was  a  beauty  in  those  ancient  forms,  and  can  dis- 
cover no  superstition  in  them.  If  indeed  they  could  have 
been  reasonably  thought  to  imply,  that  a  Christian  minis- 
ter is  a  priest,  in  the  sense  of  an  offerer  of  sacrifice,  and 
that  the  table  is  an  altar  and  the  elements  a  sacrifice,  in 
any  other  than  figurative  senses,  he  would  have  zealously 
opposed  the  admission  of  such  unevangelical  sentiments 
as  he  conceives  them  to  be.  The  English  reformers  care- 
fully exploded  every  thing  of  this  sort,  at  the  time  of  their 
issuing  of  the  first  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  con- 
tained the  oblation  and  the  invocation.  Although  they 
were  left  out  on  a  subsequent  review,  yet  it  is  known  to 
have  been  done  at  the  instance  of  two  learned  foreigners, 
and  in*  order  to  avoid  what  was  thought  the  appearance  of 
encouragement  of  the  superstition,  which  had  been  done 
away.  The  restoring  of  those  parts  of  the  service  by  the 
American  Church  has  been  since  objected  to  by  some  few 
among  us.  To  show  that  a  superstitious  sense  must  have 
been  intended,  they  have  laid  great  stress  on  the  printing 
of  the  words  "which  we  now  offer  unto  thee,"  in  a  different 
character  from  the  rest  of  the  prayers.  But  this  was  mere  } 
accident.  The  bishops,  being  possessed  of  the  form  used 
in  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  which  they  had  altered  in  - 
some  respects,  referred  to  it,  to  save  the  trouble  of  copying. 
But  the  reference  was  not  intended  to  establish  any  partic- 
ular manner  of  printing;  and,  accordingly,  in  all  the  edi- 
tions of  the  Prayer  Book  since  the  first,  the  aforesaid  words 
have  been  printed  in  the  same  character  with  the  rest  of 
the  prayer,  without  any  deviation  from  the  original  appoint- 
ment. Bishop  Seabury's  attachment  to  these  changes,  may 


I  So  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

be  learned  from  the  following  incident.  On  the  morning 
of  the  Sunday  which  occurred  during  the  session  of  the 
convention,  the  author  wished  him  to  consecrate  the  ele- 
ments. This  he  declined.  On  the  offer  being  again  made 
at  the  time  when  the  service  was  to  begin,  he  still  declined, 
and,  smiling,  added — To  confess  the  truth,  I  hardly  con- 

i.    p  /  sider  the   form    to   be    used,    as   strictly   amounting   to   a 

consecration.     The  form  was  of  course  that  used  hereto- 

fore;   the  changes  not  having  taken  effect.     These  senti- 

'  ments  he  had  adopted,   in  his  visit  to  the  bishops   from 

r/  ^     whom  he  received  his  Episcopacy. 

/   . ,  In  the  occasional  services,  there  was  so  little  difference 

of  opinion,  that  nothing  interesting  is  recollected. 

Although  the  canons,  published  at  the  last  convention, 
came  under  review  in  this,  and  received  alterations  and  ad- 
ditions, yet  there  was  no  memorable  incident  connected 
with  them.  They  passed  in  the  other  house  almost  the 
same  as  they  were  drawn  up  and  sent  to  them  by  the 
bishops. 

When  it  was  intimated,  that  there  should  again  be  a 
recurrence  to  the  article  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  this  was 
with  the  view  of  delivering  sentiments  entertained  op  the 
subject,  as  expressed  in  the  following  letter  to  Bishop  Sea- 
bury,  written  at  the  crisis  of  the  difficulty,  which  arose  on 
the  appearance  of  the  misunderstanding. 

Philadelphia,  December,  1789. 
RIGHT  REVEREND  AND  DEAR  SIR, 

I  received  your  friendly  letter  of  October  nth,  and  laid 
it  before  the  committee,  who  have  expressed  no  formal  de- 
termination on  the  subject,  although  it  appears  to  me  to  be 
the  sense  of  the  members,  that  they  can  not  recede  from  the 
proposal  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

Having  revolved  the  matter  most  seriously  in  my  mind, 
I  have  thought  that  it  might  serve  the  two  purposes  of  a 
friendly  communication  with  you,  and  of  leaving  a  record 
of  the  principles  on  which  I  act,  if  I  exhibit,  as  briefly  as 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  181 

possible,  and  without  citing  authorities,  a  general  view  of 
my  sentiments  on  the  point:  I  shall  arrange  them  under 
these   heads — the  history  of  the   article — its  merits   as  a 
Scripture  question — and  the  present  state  of  it  in  this  Church. 
As  to  its  history:  I  take  its  first  appearance  in  a  particu- 
lar creed  to  have  been  as  stated  in  the  Preface  to  the  Pro- 
posed Book,  and  to  have  meant  no  more  than  burial.     The 
archbishops  tell  us  that  it  was  inserted  in  opposition  to  an 
ancient  heresy — meaning  the  Apollinarian.*    I  can  not  find,\ 
although  I  formerly  took  some  pains  for  the  purpose,  any)  • 
avowed  reference  of  this  sort.     Nevertheless,  as  Christ's  De- 
scent into  Hell,  before  the  insertion  of  the  article,  was  un- 
questionably appealed  to  by  the  Catholics,  as  a  confutation 
of  the  heresy,  I  should  not  be  surprised  to  find  evidence  of     • 
its  being  inserted  with  a  view  to  that.     Further,  the  univer- 
sal and  uncontradicted  prevalence  of  the  belief  of  the  De- 
scent in  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  notwithstanding 
the  whims  with  which  it  became  connected,  is  of  no  small 
support  to  the  opinion,  in  the  strictest^  and  to  some  the 
most  offensive  sense  of  the  words.     Here,  as  it  is  connected 
with  the  subject,  let  me  mention  what  I  take  to  be  the 
meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  ^ixt?  and  the  Greek  word  adrjs. 
The   former   signifies,    sometimes,   merely   the   grave,  and 
sometimes,  most  evidently  to  my  mind,  a  place  of  unhappi- 
ness.     ASrjf,  generally  conveys  the  last  mentioned  idea.     Al- 
though some  passages  may  be  found,  in  which  it  is  applied     , 
to  a  future  state  indeterminately,  yet  I  take  it  to  be  the  j, 
opinion  of  our  best  judges,  that  its  general  and  proper  mean-  ^J^ 
ing  is  the  dominion  of  Satan  or  a  place  of  torment.     But 
not  to  digress  too  far,  I  hold  it  to  be  an  unquestionable 
fact,  that  from  the  time  of  the  general  prevalence  of  the 
article  in  question,  as  superadded   to   the   burial,    it   was   ' 
universally  understood  in  the  strict  sense,  and  so  continued 
to  the  time  of  the  reformation,  was  then  adopted  by  our 
Church  in  the  same  sense;  although  afterward,  by  dropping  * 

*  See  ante,  pp.  126,  175.     Ed. 


182  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCIL 

the  reference  to  the  place  in  St.  Peter,  she  left  more  lati- 
tude as  to  the  precise  manner  of  explaining  the  article. 

This  brings  me  to  my  second  particular — the  merits  of 
the  article  as  a  Scripture  question.  Here,  truth  and  can- 
dor require  me  to  acknowledge,  that  they  who  hold  the 
doctrine  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  words,  have  much  to  say. 
It  takes  off  most  of  the  obscurity  of  the  place  in  St.  Peter, 
above  alluded  to,  which,  otherwise,  seems  incoherent  and 
unintelligible.  There  is  another  passage  in  the  next  chap- 
ter, (iv.  6.)  which,  on  this  construction,  is  natural  and  of 
obvious  meaning,  but  of  which  I  never  met  with  any  other 
tolerable  interpretation.  The  passage  from  the  Epistle  to 
the  Ephesians,  which  we  read  in  the  ordination  service,  has 
been  otherwise  ingeniously  interpreted,  but  with  a  very 
forced  and  unnatural  interpretation  of  the  words — "  the 
lower  parts  of  the  earth,"  and  with  the  entire  loss  of  con- 
nection with  the  quotation  from  the  Old  Testament.  The 
passage  Col.  ii.  15,  has  also  a  leaning  this  way.  That  in 
the  sixteenth  Psalm,  if  we  consider  it  a  mere  prophecy  con- 
cerning our  Saviour,  may  mean  His  resurrection  only;  for 
the  word  "soul"  is  often  put  for  person,  and  sometimes  for 
the  mere  body  in  the  Old  Testament.  As  to  the  repetition, 
it  is  agreeable  to  a  well  known  characteristic  of  eastern 
poetry.  But  if — which  seems  the  most  reasonable — we  take 
the  prophecy  to  relate  immediately  to  David,  although  re- 
motely and  completely  to  the  Messiah,  the  beautiful  verses 
which  follow,  show  the  Psalmist's  expectation  of  spiritual 
happiness,  antecedently  to  and  independently  on  resur- 
rection. Accordingly,  they  give  an  aspect  to  the  verse 
in  question,  of  pertaining — in  its  remote  sense — as  well  to 
the  soul  as  to  the  body  of  the  Redeemer. 

But  although,  for  the  above  reasons,  the  doctrine  seems 
probable  in  its  strict  sense,  yet,  considering  that  the  pas- 
sages are  few,  that  they  are  obscure,  and  that  they  are  in- 
troduced incidentally — except  the  last,  which  admits  of 
another  interpretation;  and  that  the  sense  does  not  appear, 
like  the  divinity,  the  incarnation,  the  humanity,  and  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  183 

atonement  of  Christ,  as  a  leading  truth  of  Holy  Writ,  I  do 
not  wish  to  have  it  required  as  an  essential  of  Christian 
faith:  and  I  think,  that  the  article  may  very  well  be  so 
softened  and  explained,  as  that  the  use  may  be  understood, 
whatever  be  the  form,  to  express  no  more  than  the  passing 
into  a  place  of  departed  spirits.  There  would  seem  to  be 
no  objection  to  this,  since  «5?/s  sometimes  means  the  invisi- 
ble state,  without  any  appropriation  to  happiness  or  misery, 
agreeaBly  to  the  use  of  it  among  the  Greeks,  from  whom 
the  word  was  taken.  The  truth  of  the  doctrine  with  this 
latitude,  rests  on  passages  more  explicit  than  those  quoted, 
and  indeed,  on  the  whole  analogy  of  our  faith.  Into  the 
proof  of  this  I  do  not  go,  not  understanding  it  to  be  in  dis- 
pute among  us.  However,  I  will  not  affirm  the  necessity 
of  making  it,  although  true,  an  article  in  so  short  a  compo- 
sition as  the  Apostles'  Creed.  As  to  the  absurd  tenet  of 
the  Apollinarians,  it  might  be  guarded  against  in  another 
way,  more  conveniently  and  more  explicitly.  Therefore 
the  matter  of  retaining  or  omitting  rests,  in  my  mind, 
chiefly  on  the  footing  of  usefulness  and  expediency.  If 
retained  as  explained  in  our  amendment,  it  will  not  contra- 
dict any  principle  to  which  regard  should  be  had  among  us. 
If  omitted,  it  will  be  liable  to  many  inconveniences,  to  be 
pointed  out  under  the  third  branch  of  the  subject,  to  which 
I  now  pass — the  present  state  of  the  article  in  our  Church. 

It  appears  most  unquestionable  to  my  understanding, 
that  if  a  person  of  good  sense,  but  a  stranger  to  what  has 
passed  on  the  subject,  and  entirely  indifferent  to  the  ques- 
tion, were  to  make  out  a  copy  for  the  printer  from  the 
papers  prepared  by  the  convention,  the  copy  would  be 
agreeable  to  our  amendment.  Yet  this  would  be  a  very 
ineligible  footing  on  which  to  rest  the  matter,  because 
the  members  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies 
might  truly  declare,  that  they  never  meant  it.  And  it 
would  appear  in  full  proof,  that  the  amendment  was  never 
read  to  them. 

If  the  above  should  make  the  \vhole  transaction  null, 


1 84  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  obvious  inference  is,  that  we  revert  to  the  English 
book  in  this  point;  for  as  to  the  position  that  we  have  no 
creed,  nor  any  other  service,  until  framed  by  a  convention, 
it  appears  to  me  of  such  dangerous  tendency,  and  is  so 
inconsistent  with  the  proceedings  of  former  general  con- 
ventions, and  those  of  all  the  state  conventions  in  my 
possession,  that  its  being  the  opinion  of  a  majority  of  'the 
members  of  the  late  General  Convention,  will  never  justify 
me  to  my  own  conscience,  in  making  it  a  ground  of  con- 
duct. On  the  contrary,  I  hold  it  to  be  my  duty  to  God 
and  the  Church  to  presume  the  opposite  as  the  present 
known  profession  of  our  communion. 

What  then  is  the  sense  of  the  Church  of  England  in  this 
matter  ?  The  Archbishops,  in  their  communication,  allude 
to  such  a  declared  sense.  But  with  the  utmost  deference 
to  so  high  an  authority,  I  never  could  find  it  in  any  insti- 
tutions of  that  Church.  As  to  her  writers,  they  differ  Widely 
from  one  another.  Dr.  Fiddes  is  a  strong  advocate  for  the 
strict  sense  of  the  words.  Dr.  Barrow  prefers  the  making 
of  them  synonymous  with  burial.  Bishops  Pearson  and  Bur- 
net,  are  for  the  sense  comprehended  by  the  proposed  mar- 
»ginal  note  and  rubric.  Yet  we  may  gather  from  them  all, 
that  the  strict  sense  was  the  original  meaning.  And  my 
only  objection  to  leaving  the  matter  as  we  found  it,  is  the 
rigor  of  requiring  the  belief  of  it  in  that  high  sense.  For 
although  I  should  fear  to  insert  any  thing  in  opposition  to 
it — lest  haply  we  be  found  to  "  fight  against  God  " — yet,  on 
the  other  hand,  it  is  involved  in  so  much  difficulty  as  to 
make  me  equally  fear  the  being,  by  the  requisition  of  it, 
"  wise  above  what  is  written."  The  latter  may  perhaps 
be  objected  to  the  English  creed,  without  some  explana- 
tory extension;  for  notwithstanding  all  that  was  said  con- 
cerning "hell"  being  synonymous  with  "a  place  of  de- 
parted spirits,"  without  a  special  application  to  a  state  of 
unhappiness,  I  take  the  fact  to  be  generally  otherwise. 

But  now,  if  this  reasoning  should  be  wrong,  and  the 
matter  should  be  supposed  to  rest,  agreeably  to  the  sense 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  185 

of  the  committee,  who  contend,  that  by  rejecting  our  rubric 
they  retain  their  own,  and  that  the  body  of  the  Creed 
should  be  altered  accordingly,  I  proceed  to  state  the  bad 
consequences  of  their  plan. 

1st.  As  the  article  is  acceptable  to  many,  on  the  princi- 
ple of  its  combating  of  a  glaring  error,  I  would  not  even 
seem  to  countenance  that  error,  when  the  difficulty  com- 
plained of  might  have  been  removed  without  any  absurdity, 
or  the  contradicting  of  the  principles  of  any  members  of 
our  Church. 

2dly.  That  referring  of  the  alternative  to  the  choice  of 
the  respective  churches,  whether  it  be  meant  to  those  in 
the  different  states  collectively,  or  to  the  congregations  sep- 
arately, threatens  in  either  case  much  dangerous  litigation. 

3dly.  Without  entering  into  the  question,  how  far  a  con- 
vention are  bound  by  the  proceedings  of  their  predecessors, 
so  far  as  the  same  persons  are  concerned  at  this  time,  in 
reversing  what  they  did  in  October,  1786,  and  considering 
the  circumstances  of  the  case,  it  does  not  square  with  my 
ideas  of  good  faith;  although  in  saying  this,  I  only  look  at 
the  effect  of  it  on  my  own  situation. 

4thly.  At  a  time  when  our  Church  is  not  in  secure  pos-  < 
session  of  the  Episcopacy,  it  is  highly  imprudent  to  take  ; 
any  measures  which  may  impede  us  in  that  business. 

5thly.  On  the  plan  proposed,  it  will  require  a  stronger 
exertion  of  ecclesiastical  authority  than  hitherto,  to  pre- 
vent different  ways  in  the  same  church,  in  the  case  of  a 
stranger's  officiating;  whose  departure  from  the  usage  of 
that  particular  church  would  tend  to  distract  the  minds 
of  the  people. 

6thly.  There  are  proofs  on  this  very  point,  that  gentle-  hr^-tf 
men  may  resolve  on  such  matters  in  convention,  and  yet, 
in  their  respective  cures,  may  not  have  constancy  to  carry  • 
them  into  effect;  which  tends  to  throw  on  others  the  odious  /. 
appearance  of  being  singularly  forward  in  innovation. 

/thly.  We  shall  have  the  less  to  justify  ourselves  in  the 
event  of  the  inconveniences  apprehended,  because  of  the 


1 86  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

general  acceptation  of  this  article  of  the  Creed;  it  being  re- 
tained by  the  Roman  Catholics,  by  the  Lutheran  Churches, 
and  by  the  Presbyterians  of  all  descriptions,  besides  others. 

And  now,  after  all  these  difficulties,  the  question  is — • 
What  is  to  be  done  ?  I  know  not.  But  if  the  committee 
are  so  confident  of  the  goodness  of  their  construction,  as  to 
make  it  the  foundation  of  their  printing  of  the  book,  at  the 
same  time  admitting — as  they  have  done — a  declaration 
from  me  annexed  to  the  record,  that  my  signing  of  the 
Morning  Prayer  is  not  to  be  construed  as  involving  an  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  consent  of  the  House  of  Bishops  to 
that  matter,  I  am  very  willing  to  promise,  on  the  condi- 
tion of  being  thus  not  answerable  for  the  consequences,  to 
t'.irow  no  impediment  in  the  way  of  the  book  on  that  ac- 
count, but,  on  the  contrary,  to  give  it  all  the  support  in  my 
power,  making  use,  however,  in  common  with  others,  of 
the  latitude  allowed  in  this  instance  by  the  book  itself. 

I  must,  however,  my  dear  sir,  with  the  freedom  which  I 
hope  will  subsist  between  us,  confess  to  you,  that  I  feel 
most  sensibly  a  difficulty  to  which  in  this  and  in  a  very  few 
other  particulars,  I  am  subjected  by  the  late  fixture  of  the 
constitution.  So  far  as  the  making  of  the  bishops  a  sepa-  < 
rate  house  tended  to  conciliate  our  eastern  brethren,  I  re-  > 
joice  in  it,  as  for  the  good  of  the  Church.  And  so  far  as  it 
lately  gave  me  much  of  your  company  and  conversation,  I 
remember  it  with  peculiar  personal  satisfaction.  I  think 
further,  that,  on  this  plan,  matters  are  more  likely  to  be 
matured  than  on  that  of  a  single  house.  But  it  is  a  dictate 
of  natural  justice,  that  there  should  be  no  apparent,  where 
there  is  no  real,  responsibility.  If  any  one  should  compare 
the  constitution,  with  the  known  fact  and  general  persua- 
sion of  our  having  before  a  liturgy,  he  will  presume  of  a 
majority  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  that  is,  in  the  present 
case,  of  all  of  the  order  present,  that  they  were  in  their 
judgments  favorable  to  all  the  alterations  made.  This, 
you  know,  was  not  the  fact.  And  although,  in  regard  to 
the  points  given  up,  I  shall  think  nothing  of  them,  if,  in  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  187 

event,  the  great  good  should  be  accomplished  of  having 
one  service  for  the  Church  in  these  states;  yet  I  wish  that 
the  thing  had  been  otherwise  contrived  as  to  that  same 
responsibility.  And  if  the  operation  be  a  hard  one,  in  re- 
lation to  matters  to  which  we  gave  our  sanction,  although 
we  wished  them  otherwise,  it  will  be  more  so,  on  a  point  to 
which  we  have  given  no  sanction.  Still  I  know  of  no  ex- 
pedient besides  that  suggested. 

You  will  rejoice  to  find,  that  I  have  nothing  to  add  on  a 
subject  on  which  I  must  have  been  at  this  time  very  te- 
dious to  you  and  therefore  I  conclude  myself, 

Your  affectionate  brother, 

WM.  WHITE. 

Right  Rev.  Bishop  Seabury. 


K.     Page  30.     Of  the  Convention  in  1792. 

The  bishops  present  at  this  convention,  were  Bishops  o    /•*/*" 
Seabury,  White,  Provoost,  Madison,  and,   after  consecra-  <v. 
tion,  Claggett. 

Bishop  Provoost  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and 
Dr.  William  Smith,  of  Pennsylvania,  in  the  House  of  Cler- 
ical and  Lay  Deputies.  The  secretaries  of  the  two  houses 
were,  of  the  former  first  the  Rev.  Samuel  Keene,  and  after- 
wards the  Rev.  Leonard  Cutting;  and  of  the  latter,  the 
Rev.  John  Bisset. 

The  occasion  was  opened,  by  a  sermon  from  Bishop  Sea- 
bury,  agreeably  to  the  desire  of  the  last  convention. 

An  unpropitious  circumstance  attended  the  opening  of 
this  convention;  but  was  happily  removed,  before  proceed- 
ing to  business.     Bishop  Seabury  and  Bishop  Provoost  hadV 
never,  when  the  former  had  been  in  New  York  at  different1)  T 
times  since  his  consecration,  exchanged  visits.     Although  ' 
the  author  knows  of  no   personal   offence  that   had   ever' 
passed  from  either  of  them  to  the  other,  and  indeed  was 
assured  of  the  contrary  by  them  both;  yet  the  notoriety, 


1 88  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

that  Bishop  Provoost  had  denied  the  validity  of  Bishop  Sea-  ( 
bury's  consecration,  accounted  at  least  for  the  omission  of 
the  attentions  of  a  visit,  on  either  side.  This  very  thing 
had  not  been  without  its  consequences  on  the  proceeding 
of  the  conventions:  which  is  here  stated,  as  a  caution  against 
such  partial  considerations,  acted  on  without  due  delibera- 
tion, and  producing  inconsistencies  of  conduct.  For  in  the 
convention  of  June,  1786,  on  the  question  of  denying  the 
validity  of  Bishop  Seabury's  ordinations,  the  vote  of  New 
York  is  "Aye,"  although  it  was  well  known,  that  two  of  the 
three  clergymen  from  that  state  had  paid  attentions  to  Dr. 
Seabury,  as  a  bishop;  and  that  he  stood  high  in  their  es-  \ 
teem.  But  they  acted  under  instructions  from  the  Church 
in  their  state  when  the  convention  of  it  was  of  a  complex- 
ion corresponding  with  that  vote.  Afterward,  in  the  Gen- 
eral Convention  of  1789,  the  convention  of  New  York  hav- 
ing been,  at  its  preceding  meeting,  composed  principally 
of  gentlemen  of  an  opposite  sentiment  on  this  subject,  the 
deputies  from  that  state  were  among  the  foremost  in  pro- 
ducing the  resolution  then  come  into,  of  recognizing  Bishop 
Seabury's  Episcopal  character. 

But  to  return  to  the  narrative.  The  prejudices  in  the 
minds  of  the  two  bishops  were  such  as  threatened  a  dis- 
tance between  them;  which  would  give  an  unfavorable  ap- 
pearance to  themselves,  and  to  the  whole  body,  and  might 
perhaps  have  an  evil  influence  on  their  deliberations.  But 
it  happened  otherwise.  On  a  proposal  being  made  to  them 
by  common  friends,  and  through  the  medium  of  the  pres- 
ent author,  on  the  suggestion  of  Dr.  Smith,  they  consented 
without  the  least  hesitation,  Bishop  Seabury  to  pay,  and 
Bishop  Provoost  to  receive  the  visit,  which  etiquette  en- 
joined on  the  former  to  the  latter;  and  was  as  readily  ac- 
cepted by  the  one,  as  it  had  been  proffered  by  the  other. 
The  author  was  present  when  it  took  place.  Bishop  Pro- 
voost asked  his  visitant  to  dine  with  him  on  the  same  day, 
in  company  of  the  author  and  others.  The  invitation  was 
accepted;  and  from  that  time,  nothing  was  perceived  in 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  189 

either  of  them,  which  seemed  to  show,  that  the  former  dis- 
tance was  the  result  of  any  thing  else  but  difference  in 
opinion. 

There  was  another  matter,  which  threatened  the  excite- 
ment of  personal  resentments,  but  it  was  got  over  as  hap- 
pily as  the  preceding. 

When  the  bishops  met  in  the  vestry-room  of  Trinity 
Church,  on  Wednesday,  the  I2th  of  September,  it  appeared, 
that  Bishops  Proyoost  and  Madison  were  dissatisfied  with  C 
the  rule  in  regard  to  the  presidency,  as  established  in  1789.  / 
As  ttieTiouse  were  divided  on  the  question  of  repealing  the 
rule,  it  would  have  stood.     But  this  might  have  been  con- 
strued into  an  ungenerous  advantage  of  the  prior  meeting; 
in  which,  those  now  in  the  negative  had  voices,  and  the 
others  had  done.     The  day  passed  over  without  any  deter- 
mination; which  was  not  productive  of  inconvenience;  the 
morning  being  principally  occupied  by  the  religious  service, 
and  the  convention  not   meeting  in  the  aftfernoon.     The 
next  morning,  the  author  received  a  message  from  Bishop 
Seabury,  requesting  a  meeting  in  private,  before  the  hour 
of  the  convention.     It  took  place  at  Dr.  Moore's,  where  he 
lodged.     He  opened  his  mind  to  this  effect — That  from  the 
course  taken  by  the  other  two  bishops  on  the  preceding 
day,  he  was  afraid  they  had  in  contemplation  the  debarring 
of  him  from  any  hand  in  the  consecration,  expected  to  take 
place  during  this  convention — that  he  could  rrot  submit  to  > 
this,  without  an  implied  renunciation  of  his  consecration,  i 
and  contempt  cast  on  the  source  from  which  he  had  re- 
ceived it — and  that  the  apprehended  measure,  if  proposed  (' 
and  persevered  in,  must  be  followed  by  an  entire  breach  ' f 
with  him,  and,  as  he  supposed,  with  the  Church  under  his 
superintendence. 

The  author  expressed  his  persuasion,  that  no  such  de- 
sign was  entertained,  either  by  Bishop  Provoost  or  by 
Bishop  Madison;  and  his  determination,  that  if  it  were,  it 
should  not  have  his  concurrence.  He  believed  they  wished, 
as  he  also  did,  to  have  three  bishops  present  under  the 


190  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

English  consecration,  whenever  such  an  occasion  as  that 
now  expected,  should  occur.     The  being  united  in  the  act 
with  a  bishop  who  should  consecrate  through  another  line, 
would  not  weaken   the  English  chain.     In  regard  to  the 
question  of  presidency,  on  which  Bishop  Seabury  had  in- 
timated that  he  should  not  be  tenacious,  the  author  told    A    , 
him,  that  his  opinion  being  the  same  as  in   1789,  he  could    • 
not  consistently  vote  for  the  reversing  of  the  rule,  which,  I 
if  it  were  done,  he  thought  had  best  be  by  the  absence  that 
morning  of  one  of  the  two  now  conversing,  and  that  should 
Bishop  Seabury  think  it  proper  in  this  way  to  waive  his 
right  under  the  rule,  the  author  pledged  himself,  that  in  no 
event  would  he  have  a  hand  in  the  ensuing  consecration,  if 
it  were  to  be  accompanied  by  the  rejection  of  Bishop  Sea- 
bury's  assistance  in  it;  although  there  was  still  entertained 
the  persuasion,  that  no  such  measure  would  be  thought  of, 
as  indeed  proved  to  be  the  fact.     Hands  were  given  in  tes- 
timony of  mutual  consent   in    this  design.     He   absented 
himself  that  morning,  and  the  rule  was  altered,  in  the  man- 
ner related  on  the  journal;  that  is  for  the  presidency  to  go  f 
in  rotation,  beginning  from  the  north;  which  made  Bishop  / 
Provoost  the  president  on  the  present  occasion. 

At  the  opening  of  this  convention,  it  was  no  small  satis- 
faction to  many,  to  find  lay-deputies  from  Connecticut. 
The  aversion  entertained  by  the  clergy  in  that  state,  to 
this  part  of  the  institution  in  the  more  southern,  had  been( 
one  of  the  principal  impediments  to  a  union:  and  when  it' 
Avas  at  last  effected,  it  was  with  a  latitude  to  them  in  this 
article.  Some  of  the  laity,  at  the  time,  were  afraid  that 
this  would  be  the  beginning  of  rejecting  them  entirely. 
But  the  event  ought  to  be  noticed,  as  a  proof  that  forbear- 
ance and  mutual  toleration  are  at  least  sometimes  a  shorter 
way  to  unity,  than  severity  and  stiffness. 

On  the  subject  of  the  Prayer  Book,  there  was  nothing 
which  could  properly  come  before  the  convention  without 
another  review,  and  this  was  not  intended,  except  the  see- 
ing that  the  book  had  been  properly  executed.  In  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  191 

correcting  of  any  thing  amiss  touching  this  matter,  there 
could  be  no  ground  of  difference,  except  in  the  article  of 
the  Descent  into  Hell,  which  had  been  settled  as  already 
related,  and  the  subject  of  the  exclusive  copyright  of  the 
book,  which  had  been  granted  by  the  committee,  in  order 
to  render  the  book  the  cheaper,  and  to  raise  a  small  sum 
for  a  charitable  use;  which  two  objects  they  thought  con- 
sistent with  one  another:  and  further  to  secure  the  faithful 
printing  of  the  book.  The  measure,  however,  was  gener- 
ally censured  and  was  reversed. 

The  alterations  of  the  Ordinal  were  prepared  by  the 
bishops.     There  was  no  material  difference  of  opinion,  ex- 
cept in  regard  to  the  words  used  by  the  bishop  at  the  ordi- 
nation   of  priests — "Receive   ye   the    Holy   Ghost" — and  C 
"  Whose   sins   thou    dost   forgive,    they  are   forgiven,   and  ? 
whose  sins  thou  dost  retain,  they  are  retained."     Bishop  ' 
Seabury,  who  alone  was  tenacious  of  this  form,  consented  -, 
at  last  with  great  reluctance,  to  allow  the  alternative  of 
another  as  it  now  stands.     The  objections  to  the  use  made 
of  the  aforesaid  expressions — the  author  here  speaks  his 
own  sense  only,  not  answering  for  that  of  any  other  bishop 
— were  as  follow: — 

As  to  the  first — "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost,"  it  is  sup- 
posed to  express  the  conveyance  of  the  ministerial  char- 
acter, which  St.  Paul  recognizes  as  the  gift  of  the  Spirit. 
i  Tim.  iv.  14,  and  2  Tim.  i.  6,  and  Eph.  iv.  8,  II.  And  as 
to  the  expressions — "  whose  sins,"  etc.,  he  supposes  it  to  re- 
late, according  to  the  intention  of  the  service,  principally, 
under  due  regulation,  to  the  power  of  passing  ecclesiastical  / 
censures  and  of  releasing  from  them,  and  partly  to  the  de- 
claring of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  repented  of  and  forsaken; 
such  forgiveness  not  to  apply  independently  on  the  sin- 
cerity of  the  receiver.  But  although  each  of  the  expres- 
sions will  thus  admit  of  a  good  interpretation,  which  should 
be  given  by  the  clergy  as  occasion  may  call  for  it,  yet  the 
words  are  not  necessarily  to  be  used  in  preference  to  every 
other  form,  in  the  very  act  of  conveying  the  ministerial 


192  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

commission.  If  they  are  not  necessary,  they  can  not  be  so 
proper  in  the  place  in  which  they  stand,  as  some  other 
words  of  more  obvious  signification.  There  seems  the  less 
reason  to  stickle  for  the  last  of  the  two  clauses,  as  it  was 
not  of  very  early  use  in  the  Church. 

It  may  be  proper  to  record — what  would  not  otherwise 
appear  from  the  journal — that  the  greater  part  of  the  time 
of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  was  taken  up  (. 
with   debates   on  the   proposed   absolute   negative  of  the    ( 
bishops,  but  without  any  interference  on  their  part.     The    ' 
debates  ended  in  what  appears  on  the  journal  of  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  Saturday,  September   15 —  f 
its  being  notified  to  the  churches,  that  it  was  proposed  to  / 
determine  on  the  subject  at  the  next  convention. 

On  the  subject  of  the  Articles,  the  author  will  begin  with 
the  opinions  of  the  bishops  in  regard  to  the  general  ques- 
tion, so  far  as  they  are  within  his  knowledge:  and  his  begin- 
ning with  his  own  opinion,  is  merely  because  of  the  com 
plexion  which  it  may  perhaps  be  supposed  to  give  to  the 
facts  to  be  narrated. 

He  professed  himself  an  advocate  for  Articles,  the  abolish- 
ing  of  which  would,  he  thought,  only  leave  with  every  pas- 
tor  of  a  congregation  the  right  of  judging  of  orthodoxy, 
according  to  his  discretion  or  his  prejudices,  while  the  Arti- 
cles determine  that  matter  by  a  rule,  issuing  from  the  pub- 
lic authority  of  the  Church. 

When  the  question  has  been  put — whether  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  are  the  best  rule  that  can  be  devised,  he  has 
|  answered,  that  he  thought  them   better  than  any  other, 
i  likely  to  be  obtained  under  present  circumstances.     Con- 
I  ventional  business  is  too  much  hurried,  and  the  members  of 
the  conventions  are  not  sufficiently  retired  from  other  avo- 
cations, for  the  entering  on  determinations  of  this  magni- 
tude.    Even  if  the  greater  number  of  the  body  should  b< 
conceded  to  be  sufficiently  learned  for  the  work,  ecclesias- 
tical legislation  has  not  been  of  sufficiently  long  standing 
in  this  Church  to  have  established  the  characters  of  those 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  193 

who  exercise  it,  as  to  this  point,  in  the  estimation  of  the 
world.  Until  such  a  character  shall  be  established,  a  few 
obstinate  or  factious  men  will  overset,  in  their  respective 
congregations,  what  shall  have  been  enacted  in  conven- 
tion. Besides,  many  persons  among  the  laity,  and  some 
even  among  the  clergy,  had  declared  their  determination 
to  abide  by  the  Articles  at  all  events:  which  made  it  much 
to  be  feared  that  a  schism  would  take  place  whenever  any 
material  change  should  be  determined  on.  In  this  case, 
they  who  should  adhere  to  the  Articles,  would  claim  their 
relation  to  the  Church  of  England,  while  it  would  be  ques- 
tionable whether  the  others  would  have  any  permanent  tie 
among  themselves. 

Therefore,  the  author  wished  for  an  adherence  to  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  not  excepting  the  general  principles 
maintained  in  the  political  parts  of  them;  but  with  an  ex- 
ception, in  the  ratification,  of  the  local  application  of  the 
said  parts,  according  to  the  letter  of  them.  But  he  did  not 
wish  to  have  the  Articles  signed,  as  in  England,  according 
to  the  tenor  of  the  thirty-sixth  canon  of  that  Church.  He 
preferred  the  resting  of  the  obligation  of  them  on  the  prom- 
ise made  at  ordination,  as  required  by  the  seventh  article 
of  the  constitution,  considered  as  sufficient  by  the  English 
bishops;  which  would  render  them  articles  of  peace,  as  they 
are  sometimes  said  to  be  in  the  Church  of  England;  but 
not  with  such  evident  propriety,  as  they  would  then  be  in 
the  American  Church.  As  the  author  approves  of  the  gen- 
eral tenor  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  he  trusted,  that 
however  he  might  have  supposed,  in  his  private  judgment, 
the  possibility  of  omitting  some  of  them  and  of  altering 
others  to  advantage,  yet  not  perceiving  a  probability,  either 
that  such  a  change,  if  made,  would  have  been  for  the  bet- 
ter, or,  that  if  so,  it  would  have  found  such  general  accept- 
ance as  to  prove  a  sufficient  bond  of  union,  he  thought  he 
acted  consistently,  in  endeavoring  to  obtain  them  on  the 
terms  stated. 

Bishop  Seabury  was  free  to  declare  his  dissatisfaction 


194  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

with  some  of  the  Articles,  and  during  the  former  conven- 
tion in  Philadelphia,  had  expressed  a  doubt,  in  conversa- 
tion with  the  author  and  several  others,  whether  it  were 
expedient  to  have  any;  it  being  presumed  by  him,  that  all 
necessary  doctrine  should  be  comprehended  in  the  Liturgy. 
But  on  this  occasion,  he  saw  so  clearly  the  inconveniences 
likely  to  result  from  there  being  no  authoritative  rule  in  the 
form  of  public  confession,  that  he  wished  to  adopt  one,  and 
as  the  author  understood  him,  the  code  of  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles. 


Bishop  Provoost  did  not  deliver  his  sentiments  on  the     lL  ly 
subject,  which  was  the  less  exacted  of  him,  because  of  the    ' 
circumstance  of  his  being  in  the  presidential   chair.     But     r*^ 


the  author  has  always  supposed  that  they  do  not  materially 
differ  from  those  of  Bishop  Madison,  who  gave  his  opinion  )  \l 
against  Articles  altogether.     He  had  long  before  declared  ^ 
himself  on  this  point,  in  a  sermon  preached  before  the  con- 
vention of  Virginia,  some  years  previously  to  his  election 
to  the  Episcopacy.     This  sermon  was  printed,  and  opposes 
Articles,  on  the  principles  of  the  Confessional  and  the  like 
books. 

Bishop  Claggett  no  further  gave  his  opinion,  than  as  it 
was  implied  in  his  vote  on  the  question,  in  the  conference 
between  the  two  houses.     What  little  had  passed  among 
the  bishops,  was  before  the  consecration,  the  recency  of 
which  was  probably  the  cause  of  his  giving  of  his  mere  vote 
in  the  conference  of  the  houses.     His  sense  was  decidedly  ' 
in  favor  of  Articles,  as  appeared  also  in  his  usual  conversa- ) 
tion  on  the  subject. 

There  was  no  formal  discussion  of  the  subject,  in  the 
House  of  Bishops,  but  they  negatived  the  question  of  refer-  ( 
ence  to  a  future  convention,  when  it  became  the  subject  of  ) 
conference  between  the  two  houses.     The  negative  hap-  •' 
pened  by  Bishop  Seabury's,  Bishop  Claggett's,  and  the  au- 
thor's votes,  against   Bishop  Madison's  in  the  affirmative; 
so  that  the  president  was  not  called  on  to  vote.     The  au- 
thor takes  notice  that  this  transaction  is  not  recorded  on 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  195 

the  journal  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 
But  it  happened  as  recorded  on  that  of  the  bishops,  who, 
by  their  negative  vote,  only  showed  their  willingness  to 
undertake  the  subject;  for  the  postponement  took  place  of 
course,  as  the  other  house,  immediately  after  the  confer- 
ence, determined  to  dismiss  it  for  the  present. 

It  may  be  proper  to  mention  a  proposition  made  by  the 
bishops,  but  not  entered  on  the  journals. 

— '*   "       *      .,  -       ~       -^  -  /  / 

Bishop  MadisorPTiad  communicated  to  the  author,  on  // 
their  journey  from    Philadelphia   to   New  York,   a  design 
which  he  had  much  at  heart — that  of  effecting  a  reunion 
with  the  Methodists;  and  he  was  so  sanguine  as  to  believe, 
that  by  an  accommodation  to  them  in  a  few  instances,  they 
would  be  induced  to  give  up  their  peculiar  discipline,  and 
conform  to  the  leading  parts  of  the  doctrine,  the  worship, 
and  the  discipline  of  the  Episcopal   Church.     It  is  to  be  ( 
noted,  that  he  had  no  idea  of  comprehending  them,  on  the  \ 
condition  of  their  continuing  embodied,  as  at  present.     On 
this  there  was  communicated  to  him  an  intercourse  held 
with  Dr.  Coke,  one  of  the  superintendents*  of  that  society, 
which  might  have  showed  to  Bishop  Madison,  how  hope-^ 
less  all  endeavors  for  such  a  junction  must  prove.     Never- 
theless, he  persisted  in  his  well-meant  design.     The  result 
of  this  was  his  introducing  into  the  House  of  Bishops  of  a 
proposition,  which  his  brethren,  after  some  modifications, 
approving  of  the  motive,  but  expecting  little  as  the  result 
of  it,  consented  to  send  to  the  other  house.     The  proposi- 
tion is  as  follows: — 

"The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States 
of  America,  ever  bearing  in  mind  the  sacred  obligation 
which  attends  all  the  followers  of  Christ,  to  avoid  divi- 
sions among  themselves,  and  anxious  to  promote  that  union 
for  which  our  Lord  and  Saviour  so  earnestly  prayed,  do 
hereby  declare  to  the  Christian  world,  that,  uninfluenced 


*  This  was  the  name  that  was  then  borne  by  those  who  presided  in  the  Metho 
dist  communion. 


196  HfE.lfOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

by  any  other  considerations  than  those  of  duty  as  Chris- 
tians, and  an  earnest  desire  for  the  prosperity  of  pure 
Christianity,  and  the  furtherance  of  our  holy  religion,  they 
are  ready  and  willing  to  unite  and  form  one  body  with  any 
religious  society  which  shall  be  influenced  by  the  same 
Catholic  spirit.  And  in  order  that  this  Christian  end  may 
be  the  more  easily  effected,  they  further  declare,  that  all 
things  in  which  the  great  essentials  of  Christianity  or  the 
characteristic  principles  of  their  Church  are  not  concerned, 
they  are  willing  to  leave  to  future  discussion;  being  ready 
to  alter  or  modify  those  points  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  are  subject  to  human  altera- 
tion. And  it  is  hereby  recommended  to  the  state  conven-( 
tions,  to  adopt  such  measures  or  propose  such  conferences  j 
with  Christians  of  other  denominations,  as  to  themselves  ) 
may  be  thought  most' prudent,  and  report  accordingly  to 
the  ensuing  General  Convention." 

On  the  reading  of  this  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  they  were  astonished,  and  considered  it  as  alto- 
gether preposterous;  tending  to  produce  distrust  of  the 
stability  of  the  system  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  without  I 
the  least  prospect  of  embracing  any  other  religious  body. 
The  members  generally  mentioned,  as  a  matter  of  indul- 
gence, that  they  would  permit  the  withdrawing  of  the 
paper;  no  notice  to  be  taken  of  it.  A  few  gentlemen, 
however,  who  had  got  some  slight  intimations  of  the  cor- 
respondence between  Dr.  Coke  and  the  author,  who  would 
have  been  gratified  by  an  accommodation  with  the  Metho- 
dists, and  who  thought  that  the  paper  sent  was  a  step  in 
measures  to  be  taken  to  that  effect,  spoke  in  favor  of  the 
proposition.  But  it  was  not  to  be  endured,  and  the  bish- 
ops silently  withdrew  it,  agreeably  to  leave  given. 

To  guard  against  misconstruction,  at  some  future  time, 
of  the  correspondence  between  Dr.  Coke  and  the  author, 
he  records  it  here. 

In  the  spring  of  the  year  1791,  the  author  received 
from  that  gentleman  a  letter,  containing  a  plan  of  what 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  197 

he  considered  as  a  union  of  the  Methodistical  Society  with 
the  Episcopal  Church.  The  plan  was,  in  substance,  that 
all  the  Methodist  ministers,  at  the  time  in  connection, 
were  to  receive  Episcopal  ordination,  as  also  those  who 
should  come  forwards  in  future  within  the  connection;  such 
ministers  to  remain  under  the  government  of  the  then  sup- 
erintendents and  their  successors.  Dr.  Coke's  motive  to 
the  proposed  union,  as  stated  in  his  letter,  was  an  appre- 
hension entertained  by  him,  that  he  had  gj3ne_further  in 
the  separation  than  had  been  designed  by  Mr._Wesley, 
from  whom  he  had  received  his  commission.  Mr.  Wesley 
himself,  he  was  sure,  had  gone  further  than  he  would  have 
gone,  if  he  had  foreseen  some  events  which  followed.  The 
Doctor  was  certain,  that  the  same  gentleman  was  sorry  for 
the  separation,  and  would  use  his  influence  to  the  utmost, 
for  the  accomplishment  of  a  reunion.  Dr.  Coke's  letter 
was  answered  by  the  author,  with  the  reserve  which  seemed 
incumbent  on  one  who  was  incompetent  to  decide  with 
effect  on  the  proposal  made. 

It  happened  that  Dr.  Coke,  before  he  received  the  an- 
swer to  his  letter,  hearing  of  the  decease  of  Mr.  Wesley, 
the  news  of  which  reached  America  during  the  short  in- 
terval between  the  dates  of  the  two  letters,  set  off  imme- 
diately from  Baltimore  for  Philadelphia,  to  take  his  passage 
for  England.  On  reaching  this  city  and  calling  on  Dr. 
Magaw,  he  was  much  disappointed  on  hearing  of  the  early 
answer,  lest  it  should  fall  into  the  hands  of  his  colleague — 
Mr.  Asbury.  He  visited  the  author,  in  company  of  Dr. 
Magaw,  and  in  speaking  of  the  above  incident,  said,  that 
although  he  hoped  Mr.  Asbury  would  not  open  the  letter, 
yet  he  might  do  so,  on  the  supposition  that  it  related  to 
their  joint  concern.  The  conversation  was  general,  and 
nothing  passed,  that  gave  any  ground  of  expectation  of  a 
reunion,  on  the  principle  of  consolidation;  or  any  other 
principle,  than  that  of  the  continuing  of  the  Methodists  a 
distinct  body  and  self-governed.  In  short,  there  were  held 
out  only  the  terms  of  the  letter,  in  which  there  does  not 


198  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

seem  to  be  contemplated  any  change  in  the  relation  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  to  that  society,  except  the  giving  of  them 
access  to  the  Episcopal  congregations,  while  there  was 
sufficient  security  provided,  to  prevent  the  clergy  of  the 
latter  from  having  access  to  congregations  of  the  Metho- 
dists. At  least  it  is  here  supposed,  that  these  things  would  | 
have  been  unavoidably  the  result. 

The  author  saw  Dr.  Coke  twice  after  this;  once,  by  ap- 
pointment at  Dr.  Magaw's,  where  nothing  material  passed; 
and  again,  alone  at  the  author's  house,  where  Dr.  Coke  ^ 
read  a  letter  which  he  had  written  to  Bishop  Seabury, 
similar  to  that  which  he  had  written  to  the  author,  but 
with  the  difference  of  his  suggesting  to  Bishop  Seabury  as 
follows — That  although  the  Methodists  would  have  confi- 
dence in  any  engagements  which  should  be  made  by  the 
present  bishops,  yet  there  might  in  future  be  some,  who, 
on  the  arrival  of  their  inferior  grades  of  preachers  to  a 
competency  to  the  ministry,  would  not  admit  them  as  pro- 
posed in  the  letter — that  to  guard  against  the  danger  of 
this,  there  would  be  use  in  consecrating  Mr.  Asbury  to  the 
Episcopacy — and  that  although  there  would  not  be  the 
same  reasons  in  his  (Dr.  Coke's)  case,  because  he  was  a 
resident  of  England,  yet,  as  he  should  probably,  while  he 
lived,  occasionally  visit  America,  it  would  not  be  fit,  con- 
sidering he  was  Mr.  Asbury's  senior,  that  he  should  appear 
in  a  lower  character  than  this  gentleman.  These  were,  in 
substance,  the  sentiments  expressed;  and  on  reading  this 
part  of  the  letter,  he  desired  the  author  to  take  notice,  that 
he  did  not  make  a  condition  of  what  he  had  there  written. 
There  was  no  comment,  and  he  proceeded. 

In  this  conversation  he  said,  that  Mr.  Asbury  had  opened 
his  letter,  but  he  had  heard  nothing  from  him  on  the  sub- 
ject.* With  this  interview  all  intercourse  ended.  Dr.  Coke 
soon  afterward  embarked  for  England,  and  was  reported  to 
have  had  an  interview  with  Mr.  Asbury  somewhere  down 
the  river,  on  his  journey  to  the  ship.  The  author  avoided 
speaking  on  the  subject,  until  the  convention  in  1792,  and 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  199 

then  mentioned  it  only  to  the  bishops,  towards  whom  there 
was  understood  to  be  a  latitude.  It  was  evident  from  some 
circumstances  which  passed  in  conversation  with  Dr.  Coke, 
that  there  was  a  degree  of  jealousy,  if  not  of  misunderstand- 
ing, between  him  and  Mr.  Asbury.  Whether  this  had  any 
influence  in  the  enterprise  of  the  former,  or  he  perceived 
advantage  likely  to  arise  to  him,  under  the  state  of  things 
which  would  take  place  in  England  on  the  decease  of  Mr. 
Wesley,  are  questions  on  which  there  is  no  judgment  here 
formed.  The  determination  was  adopted,  not  to  hinder 
any  good  which  might  possibly  accrue  hereafter;  although 
it  was  perceived,  that  this  could  not  be  on  the  terms  pro- 
posed. 

For  a  copy  of  the  letter  of  Dr.  Coke,  and  the  answer  to 
it,  see  the  Appendix,  No.  21. 

Perhaps  it  may  not  be  foreign  to  the  present  subject  to 
take  notice,  that  the  author,  when  in  England,  entertained 
a  desire  of  seeing  the  late  Mr.  John  Wesley,  with  the  view 
of  stating  to  him  some  circumstances,  of  which  he  might  be 
uninformed,  in  reference  to  the  design  then  lately  adopted 
of  withdrawing  the  Methodist  Societies  in  America  from  the 
communion  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  Under  this  idea, 
there  was  obtained  a  letter  to  him  from  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pil- 
more,  which  the  author  left  at  the  house  of  Mr.  Wesley, 
when  he  was  from  home;  but  no  notice  was  taken  of  it. 
Before  the  author's  departure,  intending  to  go  on  a  certain 
day  into  the  city,  he  sent  to  that  gentleman  a  letter  by  the 
penny-post,  expressing,  that  he  would  on  the  same  day 
stop  at  his  house,  if  convenient  to  him.  An  answer  was 
received,  and  is  still  in  possession,  the  purport  of  which  is, 
that  Mr.  Wesley  was  then  engaged  in  a  periodical  duty  of 
an  examination  of  his  society,  but  that  in  the  case  of  a  stay 
of  a  week  or  two,  he  would  derive  pleasure  from  the  inter- 
view proposed.  As  the  stay  was  only  ten  days  after,  and 
the  latter  part  of  the  time  was  taken  up  by  the  business  of 
the  consecration  and  in  returning  visits,  there  was  no  re- 
newal of  the  proposal  of  an  interview,  especially  as  doubts 


200  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

were  entertained  of  the  delicacy  of  doing  so;  the  resting  of 
an  hour's  conversation  on  the  event  of  a  stay  of  a  fortnight 
longer,  having  very  much  the  appearance  of  a  declining  of 
the  visit.  This  may  have  arisen  from  the  supposition,  that 
the  object  was  to  impugn  a  measure  hastily  adopted  by  Mr. 
Wesley,  and  not  intended  to  be  relinquished. 

The  author  had  also  carried  a  letter  from  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Pilmore  to  the  Rev.  Charles  Wesley,  and  had  a  conversa- 
tion with  him  on  the  same  subject.  He  expressed  himself 
decidedly  against  the  new  course  adopted,  and  gave  the 
author  a  pamphlet  published  by  his  brother  and  himself,  in 
the  earlier  part  of  their  lives,  against  a  secession  from  the 
Church  of  England,  which,  he  said,  was  at  that  time  pro- 
posed by  some.  And  he  remarked,  that  the  whole  of  the 
pamphlet  might  be  considered  as  a  censure  on  what  had 
been  done  recently  in  America. 


L.     Page  31.     Of  the  Convention  in  1795. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  of  Pennsylvania,  in  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies.  The  Secretaries,  were  the  Rev.  Joseph 
Turner,  of  the  former  house,  and  the  Rev.  James  Aber- 
crombie,  of  the  latter.  The  preacher  on  this  occasion  was 
Bishop  Provoost. 

Before  the  assembling  of  this  convention,  there  took 
place  an  incident,  threatening  to  produce  permanent  dis- 
satisfaction between  Bishops  Seabury  and  Provoost,  which, 
however,  was  happily  prevented.  Although  Bishop  Sea-C 
bury  had  been  chosen  bishop  of  the  Church  in  Rhode 
Island,  the  congregation  of  Narraganset,  in  that  state,  had 
associated  with  the  Church  in  Massachusetts,  which  had 
unwarily  admitted  the  junction.  In  consequence,  a  clergy- 
man had  been  ordained  for  the  congregation  by  Bishop 
Provoost.  The  author,  during  the  sitting  of  the  conven- 
tion, received  a  letter  from  Bishop  Seabury,  respectfully 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  2OI 

and  affectionately  complaining  of  the  matter.  Bishop  Pro- 
voost,  on  the  letter's  being  read  to  him,  said,  that  on  re- 
ceiving the  letter  from  the  clergy  of  Massachusetts,  he  had 
doubted  of  the  propriety  of  the  proposal  in  it;  but  that  on 
consulting  the  clergy  of  New  York,  and  especially  those  in 
the  most  intimacy  with  Bishop  Seabury,  he  was  advised  by 
them  to  compliance;  but  that  he  perceived  objections  to 
such  conduct  in  individual  congregations,  and  would  much 
approve  of  a  canon  to  prevent  it.  Such  a  canon  was  ac- 
cordingly prepared  and  passed.  It  is  believed  that  no  dis- 
satisfaction remained. 

The  author  was  enabled  to  lay  before  this  convention  an 
application  from  a  convention  in  North   Carolina,  for  the 
consecration  of  the  Rev.  Charles  Pettigrew  their  bishop.  • 
This  gentleman,  as  appears  by  a  subsequent  letter  from 
him,  set  off  to  attend  the  convention  with  a  view  to  conse- 
cration, but  was  prevented  by  an  interruption  of  his  jour- 
ney in  consequence  of  an  epidemic  fever  in  Norfolk,  which  \  ff 
made  him  despair  of  arriving  in  time,  there  being  some 
interruptions  in  the  usual  accommodations  for  travelling. 
Why  nothing  was  done  afterward,  for  the  carrying  of  the 
design  into  effect,  is  not  known,  unless  it  be  the  decease  ^ 
of  the  reverend  person  in  question,  which  must  have  hap-  / 
pened  not  long  after. 

The  Church  in  North  Carolina  having  organized  itself 
and  sent  deputies  to  the  General  Convention  about  three 
years  ago,  it  may  be  an  act  of  justice  to  perpetuate  their 
former  effort:  rendering  it  probable,  that  the  ensuing  inac- 
tivity is  resolvable  into  the  want  of  some  clergymen  of 
sufficient  zeal  and  influence  to  take  the  lead  in  such 
business. 

There  had  been,  previously,  an  exertion  to  the  same 
good  effect.  The  Rev.  James  L.  Wilson,  ordained  by  the 
author  in  1789,  embarked  as  a  deputy  to  the  General  Con- 
vention of  1792;  but  after  an  unusually  long  passage,  ar- 
rived too  late.  At  his  special  request,  his  arrival  after 
the  adjournment  was  noticed  by  the  secretary,  as  it  now 


202  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

stands,  below  the  journal.     Mr.  Wilson  returned  to  North 
Carolina,  and  soon  after  died. 

With  the  recommendation  of  Mr.  Pettigrew,  there  came 
a  letter  to  the  author,  expressive  of  solicitude  because  of 
what  he  considered,  and  his  electors  appear  in  the  instru- 
ment to  have  considered  a  departure  in  his  certificate  from 
the  appointed  form.  The  letter  was  answered,  and  the  an- 
swer communicated  the  information,  that  the  supposition 
of  defect  was  owing  to  their  not  having  been  made  ac- 
quainted with  a  canon  passed  at  the  immediately  preced- 
ing convention,  providing  for  such  a  case  as  that  now  ex- 
isting, in  which  some  of  the  electors,  because  of  the  want 
of  personal  acquaintance,  had  rested  their  recommendation 
on  the  testimony  of  their  brethren  in  the  act. 

For  the  instrument  referred  to,  see  the  Appendix,  No.  22. 

Some  time  before  the  convention,  there  was  sent  to  the 
author,  by  a  clergyman  from  South  Carolina,  a  copy  of  a 
printed  circular  letter,  signed  by  two  clergymen  and  a  lay- 
man, and  addressed  to  the  different  vestries.  The  signers 
called  themselves  a  select  committee,  from  a  representa- 
tion of  seven  churches,  and  proposed  the  choosing  of  a  bish- 
op; but  gave  such  reasons  for  the  measure,  as  indicated  a 
design  of  separating  from  the  union.  The  author  conceived 
it  to  be  his  duty,  to  lay  this  paper  before  the  bishops, 
who,  in  consequence,  after  the  testimonials  of  Dr.  Robert 
Smith  had  been  presented  to  them  with  a  view  to  his  con- 
secration, desired  an  interview  with  him.  In  that  inter- 
view, the  author,  as  president,  being  so  instructed  by  the 
bishops,  asked  him,  whether  the  convention,  which  had...- 
been  held  in  consequence  of  the  said  printed  paper,  had  / 
adopted  the  sentiments  of  it.  Dr.  Smith  then  asked — 
Whether  his  consecration  was  to  depend  on  his  answer 
to  that  question  ?  The  president  replied,  that  he  was  not 
instructed  on  the  point.  The  Doctor  then  immediately 
said,  that  the  convention  had  not  adopted  the  principles 
of  the  paper.  So  all  difficulty  on  that  score  was  done  away. 
There  existed  no  evidence  to  the  contrary,  nor  has  there 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  203 

been  any  subsequently  received  to  that  effect.  It  has  never 
been  learned,  who  was  the  penman  of  that  wretched  pro- 
duction. Probably,  the  offensive  sentiments  contained  in 
it  were  a  temporizing  expedient,  designed  to  obviate  pre- 
judices which  were  known  to  exist  in  South  Carolina 
against  the  having  of  a  bishop  for  that  state.*  The  ten- 
dency of  the  paper  to  a  severance  of  the  Church  in  South 
Carolina  from  the  union  was  unequivocal. 

Although  the  principles  of  the  paper  were  not  adopted 
by  the  convention  of  South  Carolina,  as  appears  from  the 
testimony  of  Bishop  Smith,  yet,  as  it  was  issued  with  a 
view  to  important  consequences,  and  as  the  propriety  of 
the  conduct  of  the  House  of  Bishops  is  implicated  in  its 
contents,  it  is  given  without  the  signatures,  in  the  Appen- 
dix, No.  23. 

There  appear  on  the  journals  some  entries  requiring  ex- 
planation, concerning  the  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel  Peters. t  This 
gentleman  had  been  a  clergyman  of  Connecticut  before  the 
revolution.  He  had  gone  to  England  during  the  war,  and 
some  time  before  the  period  now  referred  to  had  endeav- 
ored to  procure  consecration  in  England,  with  the  view  of 
being  bishop  in  Vermont:  having  obtained  a  request  to 
that  effect,  from  a  convention  held  in  the  said  State.  The 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  had  declined  to  consecrate  any 
further  for  the  United  States,  the  Church  here  being  already 
supplied  with  the  succession.  It  is  stated  in  the  documents, 
that  his  reason  was  not  his  being  authorized  by  the  act 
of  parliament,  to  consecrate  any  further;  but  this  must 
have  been  a  mistake  of  the  framers  of  the  documents. 
The  convention  of  Vermont  being  thus  disappointed,  ap-^ ' tU^M^^- 
plied  to  the  American  bishops.  There  was  but  one  clergy- 
man in  that  state — The  Rev.  John  Cosins  Ogden— who  had 
not  been,  and  who  did  not  stay  there  long.  Probably  his 
going  there  for  a  time,  waawith  the  view  of  effecting  the 


*  See  ante,  p.  30.     Ed. 

f  He  is  called  both  Samuel  and  Samuel  C.  Peters.    Ed. 


204  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

object  now  treated  of.     The  conduct  of  the  bishops,  in  de- 
clining any  agency  in  the  business,  is  rested  on  the  circum- 
stance, that  the  Church  in  Vermont  had  not  acceded  to 
the  constitution.     There  were  besides  some  personal  cir- 
cumstances, which  prevented  the  paying  of  much  respect 
«to  the  solicitation.     It  was  this  transaction  which  produced  jf 
an  addition  to  one  of  the  canons;  requiring,  that  to  entitle  } 
the  Church  in  any  state  to  a  resident  bishop,  there  shall  be ' 
at  least  six  presbyters  residing  and  officiating  therein.* 

There  are  on  the  journals  of  this  convention  some  en- 
tries, in  which  it  was  thought  expedient  to  leave  a  trans- 
action unexplained,  and  so  it  might  have  continued,  had 
not  the  very  exceptionable  conduct  of  an  individual  mem- 
ber, after  the  recess,  rendered  it  questionable,  whether 
they  had  not  erred  in  not  having  expelled  him  from  the 
body;  the  only  punishment  in  their  power,  since  there 
could  have  been  no  ecclesiastical  trial,  except  before  the 


*  Of  those  concerned  in  the  election  of  Dr.  Peters,  one  may  judge  from  the 
statements  of  Dr.  Peters  himself.  He  says,  "After  the  war  was  ended,  and  the 
independence  of  America  was  secured,  the  Episcopalians  who  had  settled  the  State 
of  Verdmont,  with  the  Presbyjterians,  Methodists,  and  Puritans,  unanimously 
elected  him  their  bishop." — "History  of  the  Rev.  Hugh  Peters,"  New  York, 
1807,  p.  95.  He  accepted  the  office,  and  sent  forward  a  pastoral  address  to  the 
people  from  England,  where  he  was  residing.  Peters  says  that  he  applied  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  would  have  consecrated  him  "readily,"  had 
not  "the  act  of  parliament  of  January,  1786,  limited  the  power  of  the  king  and 
^l  ^restricted  the  number  of  bishops  to  three"  (p.  96);  but  the  Archbishop  himself, 
under  date  of  July,  1/95,  when  replying  to  Colonel  Graham,  who  as  the  agent 
of  Peters  had  made  himself  an  annoyance,  says,  after  referring  to  the  legal  im- 
pediments, that  "Mr.  Peters  could  not  receive  consecration  from  us,"  since  the 
requisite  testimonials  had  not  been  furnished  by  Vermont,  "where  for  the  last 
twenty  years  he  has  never  resided,"  "nor  could  the  want  of  that  testimony  be 
supplied  in  England,  where  he  has  lived  all  that  time,  without  the  exercise  of 
any  ecclesiastical  function  within  the  cognizance  or  jurisdiction  of  any  of  our 
Bishops." — "Churchman's  Magazine,"  1807,  p.  237.  See  also  Bishop  Chase  on 
the  subject,  Thompson's  "History  of  Vermont,"  1842,  part  ii.,  p.  194.  After, 
wards  Dr.  Peters  intended  to  proceed  upon  the  congregational  theory  and  accept 
the  call  of  the  people  as  consecration;  but  he  says  that  illness  prevented  "his 
joining  the  united  churches  of  Verdmont"  (p.  107).  Nevertheless  he  continued 
to  Sourish  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century,  dying  in  New  York  State.  Ed 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  205 

authority  of  his  proper  diocese,  where  he  would  have  been 
still  liable  to  it.  There  also  arose  the  question,  whether 
the  bishops  had  acted  correctly,  in  rescuing  him  from 
expulsion. 

It  appears  on  the  journal  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and 
Lay  Deputies,  that  on  Friday,  the  nth  of  September,  "the 
attention  of  the  house  was  called  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Andrews 
to  the  consideration  of  a  pamphlet  lately  published,  enti- 
tled— "  Strictures  on  the  Love  of  Power  in  the  Prelacy,  By 
a  Member  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Association  in  South 
Carolina  " — which  he  declared  to  be  a  virulent  attack  upon 
the  doctrines  and  discipline  of  our  Church,  and  a  libel 
against  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  which  was  alleged  to  be 
written  by  a  member  of  this  house."  On  Thursday,  the 
i/th,  it  is  recorded  on  the  journal  of  the  House  of  Bishops 
— "  This  house  requested  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  to  appoint  a  committee  of  their  house,  to  meet  a 
committee  of  the  House  of  Bishops.  The  committee  of 
this  house  is  Bishop  White  and  Bishop  Provoost.  The 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  agreed  to  the  request 
of  this  house,  and  the  joint  committee  met  in  the  bishops' 
chamber."  Further,  the  journal  of  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies  for  the  same  day  states  as  follows — "  The 
committee  "  (meaning  that  of  the  whole  house)  "  rose,  and 
their  chairman  reported,  that  they  had  considered  the  pa- 
per referred  to  them  yesterday,  which  was  from  the  author 
of  the  pamphlet  entitled — "Strictures  on  the  Love  of  Powerr' 
in  the  Prelacy,"  in  which  he  professes  sorrow  for  the  pub-  \ 
lication,  and  that  they  were  of  opinion  that  the  house  < 
should  accept  it  as  a  satisfactory  concession.  Resolved,  ) 
that  the  house  adopt  the  above  report." 

This  termination  of  the  business,  although  pressed  by 
the  bishops,  was  not  acquiesced  in  without  considerable 
opposition;  and  to  the  last,  three  very  respectable  lay 
gentlemen,  who  were  of  a  remarkably  conciliatory  charac- 
ter, pressed  for  permission  to  enter  their  protest.  It  was 
not  granted:  and  as  this  has  been  the  only  instance,  in 


206  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

(which  the  question  of  a  right  to  protest  has  undergone  dis- 
cussion, the  recording  of  a  denial  of  the  right,  falls  in  with 
the  design  of  the  present  work. 

Whether  the  course  of  conduct  adopted  were  right  or 
^j^  otherwise,  it  happened  as  is  here  related.     The  author  of 
[*  the  pamphlet,*  seeing  expulsion  full  before  him,  thought  fit 
to  look  to  the  House  of  Bishops  for  a  shelter.     After  con- 
v  vsiderable  negotiation,  in  which  the  author  was  the  medium 
of  communication  between  the  house  and  him,  he  sent  to 
v  the  house  an  ample  apology  for  his  misconduct,  which  in- 
duced them  to  interfere,  in  order  to  put  a  stop  to  the  pro- 
'   ceedings,  and  hence  their  proposal  of  a  joint  committee. 
.,  *j  I  The  offender  gave  subsequent  evidence,  that  his  professed 
j  penitence  was  jnsincere,  although  it  had  been  accompanied 
)  by  a  profusion  of  tears,  when  he  discussed  the  subject  with 
the  author,  in  the  presence  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  of  Penn- 
f  sylvania.     This  was  an  issue  which   could  not  have  been 
foreseen,  and  which  it  would  have  been  uncharitable  to 
have  thought  probable.     The  House  of  Bishops  committed 
the  apology  to  the  keeping  of  the  author  (where  it  now 
remains),  not  to  be  made  use  of,  unless  in  the  case  of  future 
misconduct.     When  this  happened,  Bishops  Provoost  and 
Madison,  who  alone  were  present  when  the  deposit  was 
made,  were  written  to  for  their  permission  to  send  a  copy 
of  the  apology  to  the  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  diocese 
to  which  the  offender  belonged.     Leave  was  given,  aud  the 
document  was  sent.f 


*  This  person  was  the  Rev.  Henry  C.  Purcell,  D.D.  See  Journals  in, 
307.  Ed. 

f  The  personal  abuse  in  the  licentious  pamphlet,  was  principally  levelled  at 
Bishop  Seabury;  and  the  ground  of  it,  was  his  supposed  authorship  of  a  printed 
defence  of  the  Episcopal  negative,  written  and  acknowledged  by  another  respect- 
able divine  of  this  Church.  On  the  author  of  the  present  work,  the  pamphleteer 
bestowed  a  commendation,  which  impliedly  exempted  him  from  the  general 
charge  of  "Love  of  Power  in  the  Prelacy."  Coming  from  such  a  pen,  it  could 
be  no  cause  of  self-gratulation;  but  it  was  encouragement  to  assist  in  the  exposure 
which  took  place,  and  which  is  to  be  attributed  principally  to  Dr.  Andrews. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  207 

M.     Page  31.     Of  the  Convention  in  1799. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  Dr. 
William  Smith,  of  Pennsylvania,  in  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies.  The  Secretaries  were  the  Rev._Jphn 
Henry  Hobart,  of  the  former,  and  the  Rev.  James  Aber- 
crombie,  of  the  latter. 

The  consecration  of  Dr.  Bass  during  the  recess  of  the  l 
convention,  and  his  appearing  on  this  occasion,  induces  the 
record,  that  on  the  7th  of  May,  1797,  he  was  consecrated 
in  Christ  Church,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  by  the  pre- 
siding bishop,  assisted  by  Bishops  Provoost  and  Claggett. 

It  is  evident  on  an  inspection  of  the  journal,  that  the 
bishops  had  no  opportunity  of  expressing  their  sense  on  the 
question  of  publishing  the  draft  of  Articles  which  it  con- 
tains. Such  a  publication  was  certainly  very  injudicious;  if 
for  no  other  reason,  because  it  might  have  been  expected 
to  be  easily  mistaken  for  the  sense  of  at  least  one  of  the 
houses  of  the  convention.  Indeed  it  was  so  misunderstood: 
whereas  it  was  the  sense  of  a  committee  only,  not  an  in- 
dividual besides  having  delivered  in  his  place  any  opinion 
on  any  article.  But  this  was  not  the  worst.  It  tended  to  f 
excite  religious  acrimony,  without  any  possible  good  ef-  j 
feet  at  the  present;  and  with  the  probable  bad  effect  of 
the  greater  acrimony  on  an  opportunity  of  settlement  in 
future. 

In  order  to  show  the  importance  of  the  exercise  of 
great  care  and  much  deliberation  in  any  measure  which 
may  affect  Christian  verity,  the  author  will  here  notice, 
that  an  important  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  was 
unwarily  affected  in  the  body  of  the  Articles,  by  the  intro- 
duction of  a  single  word.  It  was  "  priesthood,"  as  applied  . 
in  the  Ninth  Article,  to  denote  all  the  orders  of  the  Chris- 
tian ministry;  and  not  confined  to  the  order  of  presbyters, 
as  in  the  established  Ordinal,  of  the  former  of  which  there 
is  no  example  in  the  institutions  of  the  Church  of  England. 

It  is  well  known,  that  the  English  reformers  took  care 


208  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

to  show,  that  they  did  not  mean  to  identify  the  names  of 
the  Christian  ministry  with  those  of  the  Jewish  priesthood. 
Although  they  retained    the    name  of  "priest,"  which  is 
IIpt6flvTEpos  (or  "presbyter")  with  an  English  termination, 
and  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  had  stood  alike  for  that 
Greek  word  and  for  /cpcus,-  yet  this  Church  having  in  Latin 
adopted  the  word  "sacerdos,"  the  last  was  carefully  avoided 
by  the  reformers,  and   "presbyter"  was  put  in  its  place. 
It  would  have  been  in  harmony  with  this,  if  the  Article  in 
question  had  applied  "priesthood"  to  the  single  order  of 
presbyters.     But  it  is  applied  to  the  three  orders_Lcollec-  ' 
lively,  which  is  another  matter.     To  perceive  the  effect,  it 
is  only  necessary  to  suppose  the  said  Ninth  Article  trans- 
lated into  Latin:  in  which  case,  if  the  word  "  presbyteri- 
atus "  should  be  used,  it  would  be  wide  of  the  intended 
sense.     On   the  other  hand,   if  "  sacerdotium "  should   be 
taken,  the  innovation  would  stand  confessed.     This  would 
have  been  agreeable  to  the  theory  of  the  individual  clergy- 
man who  drafted  the  Articles,  but  the  rest  of  the  committee 
are  here  believed  to  have  been  unaware  of  it.     The  above  \ 
fact  is  recorded  in  order  to  show,  that  if  ever  the  doctrinal  | 
system  should  be  reviewed,  it  should  be  done  under  some 
other  circumstances  than  during  the  hurry  of  conventional 
business.     In  short,  the  review  should  be  made  byjselect 
persons,  taking  due  time  for  so  important  a  measure.    After  | 
this,  the  only  thing  left  for  the  convention,  should  be  the  i 
adoption  or  the  rejection  of  what  had  been  so  prepared. , 
This  would  be  as  hear  as  circumstances  permit  to  what 
was  done  in  England  at  the  reformation. 

It  is  not  here  designed  to  charge  any  other  fault  on  the 
Articles  proposed.  They  are,  in  substance,  what  is  con- 
tained in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  without  any  superad- 
dition,  except  in  the  particular  stated.  But  the  remarks 
may  serve  to  show,  that  in  the  work  of  clearing  that  code 
of  what  may  be  thought  unnecessary  positions,  there  is  the 
danger  of  admitting  some  novelty,  more  fruitful  of  contro- 
versy than  what  may  be  done  away.  In  the  present  in- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  209 

stance,  the  novelty  introduced  is  susceptible  of  the  con- 
struction of  obtruding  on  the  Church  the  notions  of  "  sac- 
rifice," in  the  strict  and  proper  sense;  of  "altar,"  as  the 
place  of  it;  and  of  "priest,"  as  the  sacrificer. 

In  this  convention  considerable  animosity  was  excited 
in  the  House  of  Cierical  and  Lay  Deputies,  on  the  subject 
of  the  election  of  a  reverend  gentleman  to  the  Episcopacy 
in  New  Jersey.*  Agreeably  to  the  distinction  taken  by  the 
author  of  recording  personal  matters  then  only  when  nec- 
essary to  illustrate  ecclesiastical  effects,  and  when  some- 
thing appears  on  the  journal  which  may  be  thus  elucidated, 
it  may  be  proper  to  note  in  this  place  that  whatever  ground 
was  taken  by  the  said  house  in  the  strict  construction  of  \ 
the  canon,  fixing  the  number  of  clerical  incumbents  in  a 
state  in  which  a  bishop  might  be  chosen,  there  was  a  more 
important  reason  at  the  bottom  of  the  objection  made. 
The  truth  is,  that  the  gentleman  elected  was  considered  by 
his  brethren  generally,  as  being  more  attached  to  the  doc- 
trines and  the  practices  obtaining  in  some  other  churches, 
than  to  those  of  his  own.  What  rendered  the  management 
of  the  case  the  more  difficult,  was  his  being  brought  for- 
wards by  some  gentlemen,  who  had  always  professed  the  \ 
strongest  disapprobation  of  the  least  deviation  from  the ) 
institutions  of  the  Church.  No  doubt,  they  thought  they 
perceived  some  advantages,  counterbalancing  the  unques- 
tionable fact,  that  the  bishop-elect  had  been  not  a  little 
reprehensible  in  that  line.  The  bishops^  kept  themselves 
from  taking  any  interest  in  the  subject,  no  one  of  them  ex- 
pressing his  opinion,  so  far  as  is  here  known.  It  is  to  be 
hoped,  that  their  conduct  will  be  the  same  on  any  similar 
occasions  which  may  occur!  Delicacy  requires  this,  as,  in  ^ 
the  case  of  the  requisite  testimonials,  the  approbation  of  , 
the  consecrating  bishops  will  still  be  necessary. 

Bishop  Bass  having  been  consecrated  between  the  dates 
of  the  last  convention  and  the  present,  it  may  be  proper,  in 

*  The  Rev.  Uzal  Ogden,  D.D.    Journals  i,  224.    Ed. 


210  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

this  place,  to  guard  against  any  false  impressions  which 
plight  be  made,  at  the  time  of  the  former  application,*  and 
a  paper  purporting  to  be  the  dissent  of  two  clergymen. 
This  may  otherwise  be  thought  to  have  influenced  the 
determination  in  the  first  instance,  and  to  have  prevented 
the  consecration  of  Dr.  Bass.  But  it  would  be  a  mistake. 
The  objections  referred  to,  were  generally  supposed  to 
receive  no  weight  from  the  characters  of  the  two  objecting 
clergymen.  They  were  represented  as  being  not  at  all  at- 
tached to  the  ecclesiastical  system  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 
Of  this,  or  of  the  contrary,  the  bishops  possessed  no  such 
evidence,  as  was  sufficient  to  be  a  ground  of  their  conduct 
at  the  time.  There  was  no  use  in  looking  out  for  evidence, 
as  there  was  other  ground  on  which  the  consecration  was 
declined — the  want  of  the  requisite  number  of  bishops  to  be 
consecrated  in  England,  t  When  Bishop  Bass  was  subse- 
quently admitted  to  the  Episcopacy,  the  bishops  who  con- 
secrated him  had  made  up  their  minds  on  the  merits  of  the 
preceding  objection  to  him. 

There  was  also  a  paper,  purporting  to  be  the  dissent 
of  his  own  vestry,  which  was  denied  and  found  to  be  not 
true. 


N.     Page  33.     Of  the  Convention  in  1801. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Abraham  Beach  in  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies.  The  Secretaries,  were  the  Rev.  Henry 
Waddell,  of  the  former  house,  and  the  Rev.  Ashbel  Bald- 
\win,  of  the  latter.  The  occasion  was  opened  with  a  ser- 
mon by  the  presiding  bishop. 


*  For  the  operation  of  the  Peters  movement  in  Vermont  in  connection  with 
Bishop  Bass's  election  in  that  state,  see  Thompson's  Vermont,  part  i.,  p. 
195.  Ed. 

f  See  ante,  p.  26,  «.  and  p.  144.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  .         211 

No  sooner  were  the  convention  organized,  than  there 
came  from  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  a  call 
for  a  letter  which  they  understood  to  have  beeji_sent  to  the 
author  by  Bishop  Provoost,  on  the  subject  of  his  resigning 
of  the  Episcopal  jurisdiction.  This  measure  raised  a  very 
serious  question,  made  the  more  important  by  its  being 
unexpected.  The  whole  of  the  merits  of  it,  so  far  as  it 
was  discussed  at  the  time,  is  in  the  entry  of  the  House  of 
Bishops  on  their  journal,  which  is  therefore  given  in  the 
Appendix,  No.  24. 

As  the  Articles  were  at  last^ established  by  this  conven- 
tion,  the  author  thinks  it  may  be  of  use,  to  give  a  narrative 
of  some  particulars  in  the  management  of  that  matter,  in 
addition  to  what  has  been  stated  relative  to  the  proceeding 
in  1792. 

When  the  book  was  edited  with  the  proposed  altera- 
tions of_j^8^;  no  sooner  were  they  known  in  the  different 
states,  than  the  sentiment  became  general,  that  they  were 
not  to  be  received  without  alterations;  while  yet  there  was 
nothing  like  unanimity,  in  regard  to  what  the  alterations 
should  be.  The  same  may  be  said  in  regard  to  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles.  Some  changes,  independently  on  what  was 
of  a  local  and  political  nature,  seemed  desired  by_all;  but 
of  any  considerable  agreement  in  particulars,  there  was 
little  prospect. 

Accordingly,  the  Church  was  left  in  a  situation  very  em- 
barrassing in  regard  to  the  standard  of  her  doctrinal  pro- 
fession. On  the  one  hand,  the  Articles,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  political  parts,  the  obligation  of  which  had  been 
abrogated  by  Divine  Providence  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  the  revolution,  were  still  the  acknowledged  faith 
of  the  Church;  while  on  the  other  hand,  they  could  not  be 
edited  as  such,  without  changes  at  least  in  the  manner  of 
exhibiting  them,  which  no  individual  had  a  right  to  regu- 
late. What  rendered  the  situation  of  the  Church  the  worse 
in  this  respect,  was,  that  it  suited  the  opinions  of  some,  to 
declare  in  consequence  of  it,  that  she  had  no  Articles,  and 


212 


MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


could  have  none,  until  they  should  be  framed  by  a  con- 
vention, and  established  by  its  authority.  In  support  of 
this  sentiment,  they  pleaded  what  has  been  stated  as  the 
very  exceptionable  manner  of  doing  business,  adopted  by 
the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  in  the  year  1789. 
I  That  house,  in  regard  to  every  part  of  the  Prayer  Book  on 
which  they  acted,  brought  the  office  forward  as  a  matter 
originating  with  them,  and  not  their  alterations,  as  affect- 
ing an  office  already  known  and  of  obligation.*  It  was 
answered,  that  this  was  an  assumption  of  but  one  of  the 
houses  of  a  single  convention;  that  the  other  house  had 
even  then  adopted  a  contrary  course;  that  the  same  had 
been  done  in  all  the  preceding  conventions,  and  that  in  the 
only  subsequent  convention  in  which  there  had  been  any 
alteration  of  a  former  standard — meaning  of  the  Ordinal, 
altered  in  1792 — it  had^been  so  acted  on,  as  to  acknowledge 
the  obligation  of  the  old  forms,  with  the  exception  of  the 
political  parts,  until  altered.  This  seems  conclusive  rea- 
soning, and  yet  the  opposite  doctrine  was  held  by  many, 
which  threatened  unhappy  consequences. 

During  the  convention  of  1789,  although  nothing  was 
done  relatively  to  the  Articles,  there  was  much  serious 
conversation  on  the  subject:  when  the  author  was  surprised 
to  find,  that  Bishop  Seabury,  the  only  bishop  at  the  con- 
vention besides  himself,  doubted  of  the  need  of  Articles; 
and  was  rather  inclined  to  believe,  that  the  object  of  them 
might  be  accomplished  through  the  medium  of  the  Liturgy. 
This  was  so  wide  of  what  might  have  been  expected  from 


*  The  Lower  House  in  1789  appeared  to  have  acted  somewhat  differently  from 
the  same  house  in  1785  (Journals  i,  22),  in  that  action  was  taken  to  secure  a 
Prayer  Book  without  reference  to  the  English  Book  (Journals  I,  p.  103.)  Other- 
wise,  the  house  commenced  de  novo ;  while  Article  VIII.  seems  to  make  the  book 
thus  independently  drawn  up  the  ultimate  authority  on  doctrine  and  worship. 
Bishop  White  refers  to  the  fact,  that  the  other  house  in  1789  acted  on  the  prin- 
ciple that  the  English  Book  should  be  taken  as  the  basis  of  the  new  book;  yet  at 
that  time  the  House  of  Bishops  was  composed  simply  of  himself  and  Bishop  Sea- 
bury. — See  ante,  p.  29.  See  "Amer.  Church  Review,"  1880,  p.  226.  Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS,  213 

his   usual   turn   of  sentiment,   that,   to   the   author,    there 
seemed  at  the  time  no  way  of  accounting  for  it,  otherwise 
than  by  the  supposition,   that  the   bishop   conceived   the 
Articles  to  be  nearer  to  the  height  of  Calvinism,  than  they^f 
are  found  to  be  on  due  consideration  of  their  history,  and   j 
of  contemporary  controversies.     But  it  has  since  appeared,  . 
that  there  had  never  been  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  or  any 
such  standard  in  the   non-juring   Church   of  Scotland,   in 
\\TiichTTshop  Seabury  was  consecrated,  and  to  the  ways  of 
which  he  was  very  much  attached.     But  the  said  Church, 
very  soon  after  the  time  here  referred  to,  and  when  her 
clergyliook  the  oaths  to  the  government,  manifested  their 
consent   with   the   Church   of  England,   by   adopting   her 
Thirty-nine  Articles.     Indeed,  there  was  never  supposed  to 
have  existed  a  disagreement  in  regard  to  doctrine:  but  it  was 
the  result  of  the  independency  of  each  Church  on  the  other.* 
In  the  convention  of  1792,  the  subject  had  been  discussed 
among   the    bishops    in    friendly    conversation,    when    the 
opinions  of  Bishops  Provoost  and  Madison  were   directly  Ay*vt*/W- 
against  the  having  of  Articles,  while  Bishop  Claggett  and^Y/^^^^' 
the  author  were  in  favor  of  them.     The  remarks  of  Bishop 
Seabury  were  general;  rather  in  the  way  of  doubt  as  to  the-- 
necessity  of  Articles;  although  on  the  other  side  he  acknowl- 
edged  his  inability  to  answer  an  argument  pressed  on  him 
— that  without  them,  individual  ministers  would  have  to  do  $ln*** 
by  their  respective  will  and  authority,  what  had  better  be 
done  by  known  law,  for  the  preventing  of  the  delivery  of 
opposite  doctrines  to  their  flocks,  by  different  preachers. 

*  In  Mr.  Belsham's  Life  of  Mr.  Theophilus  Lindsey,  Bishop  Seabury  is  rep- 
resented as  a  Calvinist.     Nothing  can  be  further  from  the  truth.     In  the  same 
work,  there  is  an  anecdote  tending  to  lower  his  character,  on  account  of  an  inci- 
dent which  took  place  at  a  commencement  in  New  Haven,  in  which  the  bishop 
had  no  more  to  say  than  Mr.  Belsham  himself;  as  the  author  has  been  informed 
on  the  best  authority.     It  was  equally  unworthy  of  the  biographer  to  speak  with 
contempt  of  the  Scottish  consecrators  of  the  bishop,  not  only  because  their  charac- 
ters repel  the  charge  of  ignorance  thrown  on  them,  but,  because  their  having  been  j 
so  long  under  the  lash  of  the  law,  for  adhe.rence  to  the  dictates  of  their  consciences,  * 
ought  to  have  produced  a  fellow-feeling  in  a  man  similarly  situated. 


214  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

However  moderate  or  uncertain  Bishop  Seabury  was  on 
the  subject,  the  clergy  and  the  laity  of  his  diocese  thought 
differently;  as  appeared  in  the  convention  of  1799,  held  not 
long  after  his  decease.  At  the  pressing  instance  of  the 
deputies  from  that  state,  and  in  consequence  of  instructions 
to  them,  the  business  was  then  entered  on;  although  prob- 
ably with  the  presumption  on  the  minds  of  the  proposers, 
that  it  would  be  finished  during  the  session.  It  however 
happened  otherwise,  the  matter  then  ending  with  a  proposed 
body  of  Articles  wholly  new  in  form,  edited  with  the  journal. 
I  The  opinion  has  been  already  intimated,  that  this  was  a 
(;  very  injudicious  measure,  but  there  may  now  be  added,  that 
\  it  proved  beneficial  in  its  unexpected  consequences.  It  ap- 
peared an  injudicious  measure,  on  the  same  ground  on 
which  the  proposal  of  1785  was  found  to  be  such:  that  is, 
as  unsettling  a  present  fixture,  without  any  reasonable 
prospect  of  establishing  a  substitute.  If  it  were  beneficial 
in  its  consequences,  this  happened  by  its  showing  of  the  irn- 
/  probability  of  agreement  in  a  new  form,  and  its  thus  con- 
tributing to  the  recognizing  of  the  old  Articles.  Even  the 
mistakes  of  readers  contributed  to  this  effect.  For  it  is 
astonishing  how  many,  even  of  the  clergy,  considered  what 
was  edited  as  proposed  for  the  acceptance  of  a  future  con- 
vention, \vhereas  it  was  only  recorded  by  one  of  the  houses 
*  to  be  matter  of  future  discussion.  As  for  the  bishops,  they 
never  saw  the  contemplated  Articles,  before  they  were  print- 
J  ed  with  the  journal,  and  they  who  read  attentively  must 
perceive,  that  it  was  merely  a  report  of  a  committee  of 
the  other  house,  without  any  evidence  of  their  approving 
of  a  single  sentence  of  it.  These  remarks  should  be  con- 
sidered as  having  no  reference  to  any  question  concerning 
the  correctness  of  the  report.  Let  it  have  been  correct  or 
not,  and  although  the  author  thinks  it  substantially  cor- 
rect, yet  he  is  confident,  that  the  issue  must  have  been  the 
same. 

That  issue  is  the  adoption  of  the  Articles,  as  edited  by 
the  convention  of  the  present  year.     Even  during  the  ses- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  215 

sion  of  the  body,  and  when  the  sentiment  had  obtained 
generally,  that  no  new  set  of  Articles  should  be  attempted, 
the  author  was  often  assailed  by  members  who  had  adopted 
the  principle,  urging  each  of  them  that  there  might  be  an 
exemption  in  regard  to  some  one  point,  the  most  desired 
by  him  to  be  corrected.  To  all  applications  of  this  sort, 
his  answer  was,  that  he  was  content  to  accept  the  Articles 
as  they  were  (the  political  parts  being  understood  to  be 
already  altered,  without  any  conventional  act),  as  the 
ground  of  union;  that  if  they  should  be  thrown  open  to 
discussion,  there  were  various  particulars  in  which  he 
thought  they  might  be  improved;  that  all  those  particulars 
he  should  think  himself  bound  in  conscience  to  bring  for-  / 
wards;  that  no  doubt  many  other  members  would  do  the  r 
like;  and  that  then — What  probability  was  there,  of  there 
being  edited  any  Articles  ? 

The  author  having  had  so  much  occasion,  in  the  relation 
of  the  proceedings  of  this  business,  to  refer  to  his  own  con- 
duct, he  thinks  that  there'  will  be  propriety  in  his  present- 
ing of  the  grounds  of  it. 

On  the  general  question — Whether  it  be  expedient  to 
have  a  body  of  Articles,  it  has  always  appeared,  as  already 
hinted,  that  to  establish  them,  is  merely  to  accomplish  by( 
a  general  regulation,  what  will  otherwise  be  done  by  indi-i 
vidual  ministers  at  will,  and  this,  sometimes,  in  intemperate 
and  scandalous  opposition  to  one  another.  For  instance, 
in  relation  to  the  Divinity  of  our  blessed  Saviour,  and  the 
Atonement  made  by  Him  for  sin,  it  can  not  be  conceived, 
that  an  advocate  for  these  doctrines  will  knowingly  permit 
them  to  be  contradicted  in  his  pulpit,  or,  that  a  denier  of 
them  will  permit  them  to  be  advocated  or  acted  on  in  his. 
Accordingly,  there  will  be  Articles,  written  or  unwritten; 
and  the  inquiry  should  be  confined  to  the~point  of  the  most 
judicious  depositary  of  the  power. 

When  the  author  Was  in  England,  being  one  day  in 
company  with  a  Unitarian  minister — a  gentleman  of  con- 
siderable note  in  the  literary  world — liberty  was  taken  to 


2l6  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

inquire,  in  what  way  the  societies  of  his  faith  held  their 
places  of  worship,  and  whether,  as  in  America,  the  property 
were  vested  in  persons  chosen  by  the  congregations.  He 
answered  with  a  smile — Oh  no;  for  then,  in  consequence  of 
the  ease  with  which  respectable  applicants  are  permitted  to 
take  pews  among  us,  it  might  happen,  that  in  the  choice  of 
a  minister,  an  interest  would  be  created  in  favor  of  a  pastor, 
not  entertaining  the  belief,  for  the  maintenance  of  which  a 
house  had  been  erected.  He  said,  that  to  guard  against 
this,  the  meeting-houses  were  vested  in  persons  who  may 
be  depended  on;  and  who  perpetuate  the  trust  to  others  of 
the  same  faith.  What  is  this,  but  an  indirect  way  of  ac- 
complishing the  object  for  which  Articles  are  designed  ? 
There  was  not  omitted  a  remark  to  the  effect  in  the  con- 
versation alluded  to:  a  freedom,  which  grew  out  of  a  pre- 
vious conversation  on  the  subject. 

The  house  of  worship  especially  referred  to,  was  that 
known  by  the  name  of  "Essex-street  Chapel."  Within 
these  few  years  there  has  been  published  the  life  of  the 
Rev.  Theophilus  Lindsey,  its  first  minister,  by  the  Rev. 
Thomas  Belsham,  who  is  now  its  pastor.  From  the  work 
it  appears,  that  the  trustees  of  the  building  have  ordered  // 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  corrected  by  Mr.  Lind-  // 
sey,  to  be  deposited  in  the  chest  with  the  title  deeds, 
to  be  the  rule  of  worship  in  future,  and  no  alterations  to 
be  permitted,  without  the  consent  of  the  major  number  of 
the  trustees. 

It  ought  not  to  be  thought  an  indecorum  towards  a 
mode  of  profession  with  which  the  author  has  no  concern, 
to  notice  the  above  particular  as  an  historic  fact,  and  to 
apply  it  to  the  illustration  of  the  impracticability  of  the 
principle  on  which  the  theory  in  question  is  grounded. 

In  the  book  referred  to,  there  is  an  office  for  infant  bap- 
tism. Why  should  this  be  required  by  a  permanent  regula- 
tion, when  some  professing  Christians  confine  the  institu- 
tion to  adults,  and  others  allow  of  no  baptism,  but  that  of 
the  Spirit  ?  The  remark  applies  to  the  celebrating  of  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  217 

Eucharist  under  the  elements  of  bread  and  wine,  in  opposi- 
tion to  those  who  contend  for  spiritual  feeding  only.  In 
relation  to  both  the  sacraments,  some,  who  acknowledge 
the  external  celebration  of  them  by  the  apostles,  affirm, 
that  the  ordinances  were  limited  to  the  apostolic  age.  The 
observance  of  the  Lord's  day,  commonly  called  Sunday,  is 
exacted  throughout  the  book;  but  why,  when  there  are 
persons  who  conscientiously  stickle  for  the  seventh  day  of 
the  week  ?  Other  questions  might  be  proposed;  and  who 
knows  what  new  opinions  may  arise,  which  may  be  thought 
worthy  of  sufferance,  and  accordingly  draw  the  book  out  of 
the  chest  ?  The  compiler  of  it  was  so  sensible  of  this,  that 
in  his  last  review,  he  omitted  the  Apostles'  Creed;  and  one 
of  his  reasons  was — "  No  man  or  number  of  men  together, 
have  any  authority  to  make  a  creed  for  others."  This 
brings  the  matter  to  a  question  of  words;  since,  in  the 
above,  it  is  impossible  to  act  without  a  declaration  of  be- 
lief, although  not  under  the  name  of  a  creed. 

In  a  note,  the  reasonableness  of  the  proceeding  is  de- 
fended, on  the  principle,  that  the  trustees,  who  have  the 
custody  of  the  book,  and  thereby  jurisdiction  over  the  wor- 
ship of  the  chapel,  are  the  proprietors  of  it.  Let  but  the 
plea  be  extended  to  any  church  or  chapel,  in  any  part  of 
England  or  of  America,  with  the  proviso  that  none  are 
compelled  to  join  in  the  worship  performed  in  it,  and  there 
ceases  all  ground  of  complaint  on  the  subject  of  confessions 
and  creeds. 

These  things  are  not  said  without  the  conviction,  that, 
in  the  premises,  ecclesiastical  authority  is  liable  to  be  ex- 
tended much  too  far.  All  contended  for  is,  that  this  spe- 
cies of  discipline  must  be  exercised  in  one  shape  or  in 
another.  It  is  called  discipline:  for  as  to  the  truth  of  syn- 
odical  determinations,  further  than  as  they  agree  with 
Scripture,  no  sound  Protestant  will  affirm  it. 

Accordingly,  we  are  -necessarily  led  to  the  question, 
whether  the  proper  mean  be  the  formula  of  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles.  God  forbid  that  they  should  be  admitted,  other- 


2l8  MEMO/AS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

wise  than  on  the  ground  of  their  being  in  substance  a  body 
of  divine  truth;  which  they  maybe,  consistently  with  incor- 
rect statements  in  sotQe__points,  not  necessarily  involved  ~In 
that  object.  For  the  illustrating  of  this  distinction,  there 
shall  be  here  cited  an  instance,  which,  it  is  supposed,  will 
admit  of  no  dispute.  In  the  Sixth  Article,  the  books  of  Holy 
Scripture  are  affirmed  to  be  the  rule  of  faith;  and  the  re- 
quired subscription  is  evidently  inconsistent  with  the  rejec- 
tion of  any  of  the  books  specified.  But  when  there  are 
f  introduced  the  incidental  expressions  — "  gf  which  there 
f  ne^jLwasjtnyjdoubt  in  the  Church;"  it  is  apparently  con- 
tradictory to  what  ecclesiastical  history  informs  us,  in  re- 
gard to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  second  Epistle  of 
St.  Peter,  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  the  second  and  third 
Epistles  of  St.  JolTn,  and  the  Apocalypse:  concerning  all  of 
which  there  were  doubts,  although  cleared  up  on  full  in- 
quiry. It  is  within  the  meaning  of  the  form  of  subscription 
in  this  Church,  that  the  prominent  fact  of  the  authenticity 
of  those  books  may  be  acknowledged,  while  the  subordinate 
fact,  couched  under  the  recited  expressions,  is  rejected. 

<  It  is  not  equally  manifest  that  the  same  latitude  of  inter- 

<  pretation  is  allowable  on  the  ground  of  the  form  of  sub- 
)  scription  in  the  Church  of  England. 

But  it  will  be  said,  that  supposing  the  Articles  to  contain 
the  whole  substance  of  revealed  truth,  it  is  the  fault  of 
them  that  they  contain  much  more,  embracing  the  tenets 
of  the  Calvinistic  system.  In  contrariety  to  this  assertion, 
the  persuasion  is  entertained,  that  they  will  be  found,  on  a 
diligent  attention  to  the  subject,  to  have  been  framed  with 
a  sUidied  latitude  on  the  questions,  which  were  afterward 
denominated  the  Five  Points,  in  the  controversy  between 
the  Calvinists  and  the  Arminians;  this,  with  the  exception 
of  the  doctrine  of  final  perseverance,  to  which  the  whole 
system  of  the  Church  of  England  stands  opposed;  the  doc- 
trine not  being  held  at  that  _tim_e  by^he  description  of 
people  afterward  called  Calvinists,  who  as  yet  continued  in 
the  opinion  of  St.  Austin  in  that  particular.  It  may  be 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  219 

proved,  that  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.,  when  the  Articles 
were  framed,  there  was  %  diversity  of  sentiments  on  those 
points,  and  yet,  that  neither  side  complained  of  their  being 
excluded.  Far  from  it,  when,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth, 
Calvinism  came  in  with  greater  authority  from  Geneva,  the 

^-"JBK™"^*  * 

constant  complaint  of  the  Puritans  was,  that  the  Articles 
were  not  sufficiently  evangelical  in  that  matter.  Hence 
the  framing  of  what  were  called  the  Lambeth  Articles,  and 
the  pressing  of  them  at  that  time,  and  afterward  in  the 
reign  of  King  James,  although  without  effect.  It  is  but  to 
compare  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  with  the  Westminster 
Confession,  or  with  the  decrees  of  the  Synod  of  Dort,  to 
perceive  how  general  and  guarded  the  first  were,  on  the! 
topics  on  which  the  others  are  very  particular  and  express. ) 
Let  these  remarks  suffice  on  a  subject,  on  which  it  ought 
not  to  be  expected  to  be  in  this  place  more  minute. 

For  the  form  of  subscription  in  this  Church,  and  for 
that  required  in  the  Church  of  England,  see  the  Appen- 
dix, No.  25. 

But  supposing  all  said  above  to  be  correct,  it  will  still 
be  asked — Are  these  Articles  so  perfect  that  there  can  be 
no  possible  improvement  on  them  ?     If  this  be  not  so,  are 
they  to  remain  forever,  with  known  and  acknowledged  im- 
perfection ?     And  if  this  be  not  contended  for,  what  are  the 
circumstances  which  will  render  the  altering  of  them  an 
expedient  measure  ?     To  these  questions  it   is   answered, 
not  without  the  answerer's  distrust  of  his  own  judgment,  \ 
first,  that  in  a  few  instances,  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  / 
may  be  expressed  more  satisfactorily  to   his   mind;    that-* 
therefore,  in  the  next  place,  he  does  not  arrogate  to  them 
perpetuity;  but  that  further,  before  any  altering  of  them  be 
attempted,  these  two  circumstances  should  concur — first,  a^  /— 
better  establishment  in  the  estimation  of  the  Church  gen-, 
erally,  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority  in  her,  as  yet  a  mod- 
ern institution;  and  how  much  this  must  depend  on  the 
general  opinion  entertained  of  the  piety,  the  learning,  and 
the  lives  of  those  who  take  an  active  part  in  her  concerns, 


220  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

it  would  be  difficult  to  calculate,  as  also  what  prospect 
there  may  be  of  the  increase  of  the  measure  of  the  good 
/>      which  we  may  have  among   us,  in   these   respects.     The 
other  circumstance,  as  declared  under  a  former  head,  is  a 
.general  conviction  of  the  ne£essity  of  committing  a  matter 
of  this  sort  to  be  prepared  by  a  jew,  with  the  advantages 
of  due  time  and  deliberation:  what  is  so  prepared  to  be  laid  I 
before  the  body,  to  be  by  them  adopted  or  rejected,  without  1 
discussion. 

"These  sentiments  are  given,  under  a  sense  of  responsi- 
bility to  the  great  Head  of  the  Church  and  under  the  con- 
viction, that  until  the  two  stated  circumstances  shall  com- 
bine a  new  code  of  Articles  will  have  the  effect  of  splitting^ 
the  Church  into  no  one  knows  how  many  different  com-  ) 
munions,  very  much  to  the  hindrance  of  true  -piety,  and  of 
those  characteristics  of  our  communion,  in  which  we  sup- 
pose it  to  approach  nearer  than  others,  to  the  standard  of 
the  best  ages. 

In  this  convention,  the  question  of  recommending  to  the 
Episcopacy  the  clergyman  elected  to  it,  as  related  under 
the  head  of  the  last  preceding  convention  came  to  a  crisis. 
The  Church  in  New  Jersey  persevered  in  the  election  of 
him;  and  there  was  now  no  longer  reason  to  hesitate,  for 
want  of  a  sufficient  number  of  incumbents:  because  the 
question  of  fact  had  been  referred  by  the  last  General 
Convention,  to  the  convention  of  the  particular  state  which 
had  decided  in  the  affirmative.  These  things  were  reported 
to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  arid  the_result 
was  a  direct  refusal  to  recommend.  The  incident,  although 
given  in  the  journal,  should  not  be  noticed  in  these  remarks, 
were  it  not  to  record,  that  the  extreme  dissatisfaction  con- 
ceived by  a  few  gentlemen,  was  prevented  from  ending  in 
the  inconveniences  of  which  there  was  entertained  an  ap- 
prehension, by  'some  controversies  of  a  parochial  descrip- 
tion. Until  this  took  place,  the  few  gentlemen  referred  to  < 
had  adopted  so  zealously  the  cause  of  the  rejected  clergy-  | 
man,  that  they  contemplated  an  application  to  the  Episco- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  221 

pal  Church  in  Scotland.     This  would  certainly  have  failed: 
but  the  project  was  communicated  by  one  of  the  gentlemen 
to  the  author.     The  bishop-elect,  a  few  years  afterward,   " 
joined  the  Presbyterian  Church,  probably  in  consequence  )      J 
of  the  parochial  controversies  referred  to,  which  had  also  < 
arrested   the  ^proceedings   in   his   favor   in   regard   to   the 
Episcopacy.* 


O.     Page  34.     Of  the  Convention  in  1804. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  Dr. 
Beach  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.  The 
Secretaries  of  the  two  houses  were  the  Rev.  Cave  Jones,  of 
the  former,  and  the  Rev.  John  H.  Hobart,  of  the  latter. 

The  opening  sermon  was  by  Bishop  Moore. 

There  needs  some  explanation  of  what  appears  on  the 
journal,  concerning  the  Rev.  Ammi  Rogers. 

He  was  a  native  of  Connecticut,  and  educated  at  Yale 
College.  During  the  Episcopacy  of  Bishop  Seabury,  in- 
terest was  making  among  the  clergy  to  procure  the  ordi- 
nation of  Rogers.  But  the  bishop  perceiving  it,  and  in 
consequence  of  an  unfavorable  opinion  entertained,  de- 
clared that  he  never  would  ordain  him.  He  afterward 
went  into  the  back  parts  of  the  State  of  New  York;  and 
there,  by  efforts  of  zeal  and  apparent  prospect  of  useful- 
ness, laid  the  foundation  of  an  application  for  holy  Orders, 
to  Bishop  Provoost.  While  the  case  was  under  considera- 
tion, the  Rev.  Dr.  Beach,  having  heard  that  Rogers  had 
been  rejected  in  Connecticut,  made  objection.  On  this, 
he  repaired  to  that  state  with  .the  view  of  procuring  from 
the  Rev.  Philo  Perry,  the  Secretary  of  the  convention  of 
the  diocese,  a  certificate  that  there  did  not  appear  on  the 
minutes  any  entry  of  the  rejection  of  the  person  in  ques- 

*  The  Rev.  Uzal  Ogden,  D.D.    Journals,  I,  264.     Ed. 


222  AfE.\fOfRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

tion.  Such  a  certificate  might  have  been  given  with  great 
truth,  because  no  formal  application  had  been  made.  But 
Philo  Perry  being  from  home,  Ammi  Rogers  fabricated  a 
certificate  in  Jiis  jiarne,  not  only  testifying  to  the  said  fact, 
but  going  to  the  point  of  the  correct  life  and  conversation 
of  the  bearer.  The  last  circumstance  is  of  importance,  be- 
cause, although  a  certificate  as  to  his  not  having  applied 
for  and  been  refused  Orders  was  obtained  from  Philo  Perry 
afterward,  yet  it  went  no  further. 

With    the   certificate   forged   as   above,    Ammi    Rogers 
waited  on   Dr.  Beach;  and,  after  thus  satisfying  him,  re- 
quested permission  to  have  the  certificate  in  his  possession 
for  a  while,  in  order  to  communicate  it  to  some  friends  in 
New  York,  who  had  heard  the  story  against  him.     This 
was  assented  to.     The  certificate  was  never  returned,  but' 
in  the  mean  time,  Dr.  Beach  relying  on  the  integrity  of  it,' 
withdrew  his  opposition,  and  Ammi  Rogers  was  ordained. 

In  a  few  years  after  his  ordination,  he  returned  to  his 
native  state,  and  made  himself  popular  at  Stamford.  The 
bishop  and  the  clergy  refused  to  know  him  as  belonging  to 
the  diocese:  and  it  was  this  which  brought  before  the 
House  of  Bishops,  by  mutual  consent,  the  question  to 
which  diocese  he  belonged. 

In  the  investigation  of  this  question,  not  only  was  the 
preceding  fact  proved  by  unquestionable  testimony,  espe- 
cially the  affidavit  of  Dr.  Beach;  but  the  clerical  deputies 
from  Connecticut,  while  they  treated  the  man  with  the  ut- 
most decorum,  produced  ample  evidence  of  a  factious  and 
mischievous  disposition  in  him.  Still,  the  utmost  length  to 
which  the  bishops  at  first  thought  themselves  warranted 
to  go,  was,  in  giving  their  opinion  on  the  case  submitted  to 
them,  to  notice  incidentally  the  iniquity  which  had  come 
within  their  knowledge,  in  the  investigation  of  the  subject. 
j  Here  they  should  have  stopped.  But  unfortunately,  one  of 
the  bishops  having  proposed  that  there  should  be  included 
a  recommendation  to  degrade  the  man  from  the  ministry, 
the  others,  under  the  sensibility  excited  by  the  evidence  of 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  22$ 

his  great  unworthiness  and  his  flagitious  conduct,  consented    1 
to  the  proposal.    This  was  ill  judged,  for  these  two  reasons: 
first,  it  would  give  room,  in  the  event  of  a  condemnation, 
to  object,  that  the  opinion  of  the  bishops,  extra-judicia.ljv 
expressed,  had  obtained  undue  influence  over  the  minds  of  S 
those  who  wer^  more  properly  the  ecclesiastical  judges  of  f 
the  offender.     Perhaps,  the  same  objection   may  seem   to 
lie  against  the  noticing  of  the  forgery.     But  this  was  too 
glaring   a  fact    to   be   denied,   and   indeed  was   admitted; 
while,  on  a  succeeding  trial,  there  would  have  still  been  a 
latitude  as  to  the  degree  of  punishment   to  be  inflicted. 
The  pointing  to  what  this  should  be  occasioned  the  other 
reason  referred  to,  by  contributing  to  what  is  here  thought 
to  be  the  error  into  which  the  bishop  and  the  clergy  of 
Connecticut    subsequently   fell,    of  supposing   that   Ammi 
Rogers  had  been   tried   by  the   House    of  Bishops.     Thisj) 
they   never   contemplated,   and   indeed   would   have   been]] 
contrary  to  the  ecclesiastical  constitution. 

The   recording  of  this   transaction,    may  be   a  caution 
against  giving  way  in  convention  in  future  to  solicitations 
which  will  probably  be  occasionally  made,  for  the  obtaining 
of  determinations  on  points  personally  and  locally  interest-  * 
ing;  but  which  may  be  left,  without  the  endangering  of 
any  principle,  to  the  judicial  authority  of  the  Church  in 
ejach.state.     That  this  is  the  most  agreeable  to  the  ecclesi-  i 
astical  constitution,  will  not  be  denied.     If  the  said  instru- 
ment be  not  wisely  contrived   in   this   particular,   still  it 
should  govern,  until  altered  by  competent  authority.     The  1 
constitution,  however,  is  here  conceived  to  be  not  liable  to  ] 
objection,  on  this  account:  and  it  is  supposed,  tbat  a  con- 
trary provision  would  be  found  impracticable,  because  of 
the  long  intervals  between  the  meetings  of  the  General 
Conventions,  the  difficulty  of  keeping  them  together,  and 
other  circumstances  which  might  be  mentioned. 

After  the  rising  of  the  convention,  this  business  of  Ammi 
Rogers  threatened  serious  consequences  to  the  Church  in 
Connecticut,  owing  to  what  has  been  already  hinted — its 


224  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

having  been  there  conceived,  that  he  had  been  tried,  and 
that  nothing  remained,  except  to  declare  him  degraded. 

When  the  author  found,  that  what  the  bishops  had  re- 
corded on  their  minutes  was  so  materially  misunderstood,  he 
wrote  to  Bishop  Moore,  to  know  his  sense  of  the  matter;  and 
found,  from  a  letter  of  that  bishop  still  in  possession,  that 
there  was  a  perfect  coincidence  of  opinion  between  them. 
The  only  bishop  besides,  who  had  been  present — Bishop 
Parker — had  died  in  a  very  short  time  after  his  return  to 
Boston.  Bishop  Jarvis  had  absented  himself,  from  a  motive 
of  delicacy;  and  Bishop  Claggett  had  left  the  city  on  his 
journey  home,  before  any  judgment  had  been  delivered.* 

In  the  form  in  which  the  business  stands  on  the  journal, 
there  does  not  sufficiently  appear  the  ground,  on  which  the 
bishops  consented  to  give  their  sentiments  on  the  question, 
as  to  the  jurisdiction  to  which  Ammi  Rogers  belonged. 
That  ground  was  in  the  urgent  solicitations  of  both  the 
parties;  which  were  though~F~to  justify  the  expression  of 
opinion. 

The  author  supposes  it  due  to  the  nature  of  this  work, 
to  annex  to  it  the  judgment  of  the  bishops  in  the  case  of 
the  said  Ammi  Rogers.  Accordingly,  it  is  in  the  Appendix, 
No.  26. 

Notice  is  taken  on  the  journal  of  the  convention,  of  an 
application  from  the  Episcopal  Church  in  New  Jersey, 
relative  to  an  unhappy  dispute  there  subsisting  between  a 
minister  and  his  congregation.  As  the  issue  of  this  was  a 
canon,  the  object  of  which  was  novel  in  the  Episcopal 
Church,  and  the  consequences  of  which  maybe  important, 
it  may  be  proper  to  record  the  origin  of  it,  and  the  general 
view  entertained  of  its  tendency  by  the  author. 


*  The  author  and  Bishop  Moore  afterward  received  a  letter  from  the  com- 
mittee of  the  clergy  in  Connecticut,  requesting  advice  on  the  question  of  again 
taking  up  the  business  of  Rogers,  and  granting  a  trial.  Both  of  those  applied  to 
advised  the  measure,  but  it  did  not  take  place.  It  would  have  been  more  discreet 
in  them  to  have  withheld  their  advice,  until  they  should  have  known  that  it  would 
have  effect. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  22$ 

The  clergyman  in  contemplation  was  possessed  of  appar- 
ent zeal,  and  was  unexceptionable  in  his  moral  conduct.     It 
is  difficult  to  ascertain  how  far  these  circumstances  should 
extend  lenity  to  what  can  not  in  itself  be  defended.     But  f 
certain  it  is,  that  he  had  manifested  a__leaning  to  practices  j 
very  different  from  those  of  his  Church.     In   addition  to 
this,  there  were  complaints  of  his  overbearing  of  the  vestry, 
and  of  his  taking  of  all  authority  to  himself,  in  the  manage- 
ment of  the  temporal  concerns  of  the  congregation.     That 
from  dissatisfaction  with  him  they  had  become  very  much 
lessened,  was  affirmed  and  believed.     The  former  of  the  ( 
objections  he  confirmed,  by  joining  another  religious  com-  ] 
munion,  as  soon  as  his  severance  from  his  particular  con-  ' 
gregation  took  place. 

In  regard  to  the  merits  of  the  canon,  there  may  be 
doubts  concerning  the  principle,  on  the  ground  that  there 
',  should  be  no  severance  from  a  pastoral  charge,  except  as 
i  the  result  of  a  trial  ifor  alleged  misconduct;  which  is  the 
most  agreeable  to  the  idea  of  exalting  law  above  will. 
Besides,  there  is  evident  danger,  that  when  a  clergyman 
should  be  degraded,  his  congregation  will  avail  themselves 
of  this  canon,  from  a  false  tenderness,  and  thus,  while  they 
rid  themselves  of  the  man,  send  him  to  disgrace  the  Church 
elsewhere.  Nevertheless,  under  the  present  circumstances 
of  the  Church,  and  until  some  check  can  be  given  to  the 
ease  with  which  ministers  are  admitted  into  congregations, 
the  bishops  consented  to  the  canon.  It  deserves  the  name  <- 
of  a  necessary,  but  —  it  is  hoped  —  only  temporary  evil.  * 
The  apprehension  of  the  abuse  of  it  has  been  verified. 

There  appears  on  the  journal  to  have  been  some  differ- 
ence of  opinion  between  the  houses,  in  reference  to  two 
canons,  and  occasioning  a  conference  proposed  by  the 
House  of  Bishops.  As  the  difference  did  not  involve  any 
important  principle,  and  as  it  was  done  away  by  mutual 
concession  in  the  conference,  no  notice  is  taken  'of  it  in 
these  statements. 

It  was  in  this  convention  that  the  House  of  Bishops 


226  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

prescribed  the  course  of  ecclesiastical  study,  still  subsist- 
ing, for  students  in  theology.  This  was  doing  something 
towards  the  improving  of  the  literary  reputation  of  our 
ministry,  and  an  advance  towards  the  desirable  object  of  a 
seminary  or  seminaries,  in  which  the  preparation  of  can- 
didates may  be  the  better  secured  by  daily  examinations 
held  by  qualified  preceptors. 

At  this  convention  there  was  established,  as  proposed 
by  the  last,  a  change  of  the  season  of  holding  the  conven- 
tions. There  will  be  propriety  in  recording  the  reason.  It 
was  on  account  of  our  country's  having  been  for  some  years 
visited  by  epidemic  disease,  in  the  autumn. 

Agreeably  to  a  proposal  from  the  House  of  Bishops,  it 
having  been  there  moved  by  Bishop  Jarvis,  the  business  of 
the  convention  was  concluded  by  prayer,  performed  by  the 
presiding  bishop,  in  the  presence  of  both  houses.  It  had 
been  the  rule  during  every  convention,  to  have  morning 
prayer  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  at  which 
the  bishops,  by  votes  of  their  body,  had  attended. 

The  City  of  Baltimore  was  fixed  on  as  the  place  of  the 
next  convention,  to  be  held  on  the  third  Tuesday  in  May, 
18.18. 


P.     Page  35.     Of  the  Convention  of  1808. 

Bisjiop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  Dr. 
Beach  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.  The 
Secretaries  of  the  two  houses,  were  the  Rev.  Dr.  James 
Whitehead,  of  the  former,  and  the  Rev.  John  H.  Hobart, 
of  the  latter. 

Bishop  Parker,  who,  at  the  request  of  the  last  conven- 
tion, was  to  have  opened  the  present  with  a  sermon,  be- 
ing deceased,  that  office  was  discharged  by  the  presiding 
bishop. 

The  thin  attendance  on  this  convention,  must  attract 
the  notice  of  every  one  who  shall  inspect  the  journal.  In 
the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  the  Church  was 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  227 

represented  from  seven  states  only;  none  coming  from  Vir- 
ginia, on  the  account  of  the  Church  in  which  state  a  city 
so  far  south  as  Baltimore  was  principally  chosen.  In  the 
House  of  Bishops,  there  were  two  only — Bishop  Claggett  & 
and  the  author.  When  the  latter  repaired  to  the  place  of 
meeting,  it  was  under  an  apprehension,  having  learned  by 
letter  from  the  other  his  being  exceedingly  indisposed,  that" 
the  question  would  be  raised — Whether  a  single  bishop 
can  constitute  a  house.  On  this,  he  was  prepared  to  sus-  r 
tain  the  affirmative,  as  being  the  most  agreeable  to  the  ' 
letter  of  the  constitution;  and  because,  on  the  contrary 
supposition,  there  could  have  been  nothing  done.  The 
case,  however,  would  have  been  very  disagreeable.  It  was 
prevented  by  the  attendance  of  Bishop  Claggett,  although 
with  a  considerable  degree  of  indisposition,  under  which  he 
labored  during  the  whole  session.  Bishop  Jarvis  was  said 
to  be  indisposed  with  the  asthma,  and  Bishop  Moore  was 
confined  by  an  inflammation  in  his  eyes.  Why  Bishop  Mad- 
ison was  absent,  was  not  knowrn;  unless  he  were  prevented 
by  a  loss  sustained  of  a  son,  not  long  before. 

In  revising  and  arranging  the  canons,   there  occurred 
nothing  material,  besides  the  two  following  particulars. 

One  of  them  respected  Candidates  for  holy  Orders. 
The  proposed  canon  prescribed  different  examinations  to 
be  held,  during  the  time  in  which  a  case  should  be  under 
consideration:  and  among  the  matters  to  be  inquired  into, 
was  the  party's  being  possessed  of  "a  practical  knowledge 
of  religion."  When  this  came  before  the  bishops,  they  ) 
could  form  no  idea  of  practical  knowledge.  They  knew,  ( 
that  in  the  other  house  it  had  been  consented  to  by  the 
majority,  in  order  to  get  rid  of  an  expression  pressed  by 
some — that  of  "an  experimental  knowledge":  an  expres- 
sion much  abused  by  its  application  to  feelings  merely 
animal,  and  unwelcome  on  that  account.  We  could,  how- 
ever, form  an  idea  of  the  sense  of  it  perfectly  unexception- 
able, supposing  it  to  be  such  knowledge  as  is  the  result  of 
experience.  But  the  bishops  did  not  perceive  how  the 


223  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

candidate  could  satisfy  his  examiners  as  to  this  point,  on 
any  other  evidence  than  that  of  his  own  declarations;  the 
requiring  of  which  was  thought  liable  to  much  abuse.  Ac- 
cordingly, they  proposed  to  leave  out  the  clause  concern- 
ing "practical  knowledge";  and  that  after  the  other  re- 
quisitions, there  should  be  inserted  an  admonition  to  the 
candidate,  of  there  being  required  in  him  those  inward 
'  graces,  which  can  not  be  brought  to  any  outward  standard, 
and  are  named  in  Scripture  "  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit " — by 
which  alone  his  sacred  influence  can  be  "  known." 

In  addition  to  this,  the  bishops  sent  to  the  other  house 
a  paper,  of  which  the  following  is  a  copy,  to  be  read  to 
them,  but  not  entered  on  their  journal,  in  the  printing  of 
which  it  accordingly  does  not  appear,  and  is  therefore  in- 
serted in  this  place. 

"  Having  proposed  the  omission  of  an  expression  which 
seems  designed  to  require  inward  piety,  we  wish  to  be 
clearly  understood  in  this  matter. 

"  Far  be  it  from  us  to  suppose,  that  any  qualifications  are 
sufficient,  without  pious  affections,  the  effects  of  the  grace 
of  God  on  the  heart.  But  although  the  living  piously,  that 
is  in  a  visible  profession,  and  in  the  duties  attached  to  it, 
may  be  certified,  yet,  the  actual  possession  of  piety  must 
be  the  subject  of  the  experience  of  the  party,  and  not  of 
the  testimony  of  his  fellowmen.  If  it  should  be  thought, 
that  they  may  ascertain  his  experience  by  an  inquiry  into 
the  movements  of  his  mind,  we  remark,  that  the  issue  must 
be  precarious,  independently  on  some  manifest  abuses  in- 
cident  to  it. 

"  The  Church  of  England  has  always  contented  herself  ( 
with  a  visible  profession,  a  suitable  life,  and  the  solemn  \ 
declarations   at   the  altar.    TTiat   in   these   there~may  be  ' 
imposition    and    insincerty,    is    unquestionable.     But    how 
they  would  have  been  prevented  by  further  requisition,  we 
do  not  discern.     We  recollect  within   that  Church  many 
wise  and  holy  men,  who  have  been  satisfied  with  her  disci- 
pline in  this   particular.     But  we  doubt   of  there   having 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  229 

been  any  dissentients,  whose  opinions  we  would  wish   to 
see  influential  in  this  Church.     We  call  to  mind  a  certain 
period  in  the  history  of  England,  when  one  effect  of  the 
entire  prostration  of  her  Church  was  the  triumph  of  the 
principle  here  objected  to.     But  we  have  learned  too  much  £ 
of  the  consequent  hypocrisy  and  tyranny  to  be  reconciled  ) 
to  any  thing  which  bids  fair  to  lead  to  the  same  result. 

"  In  America,  a  question  raised  on  the  same  ground, 
divided  for  some  time  a  numerous  and  respectable  body  of 
Christians.  But  in  consequence  of  more  mature  reflection 
among  them,  the  controversy  has  been  dying  away;  and, 
we  believe,  that  there  is  now  very  little  of  it. 

"  But  what,  in  our  opinion,  should  overrule  all  doubt,  is 
not  only  the  scheme  of  Scripture  generally,  as  to  the  requi- 
sition in  question;  but  that  St.  Paul,  in  his  first  Epistle  to 
Timothy,  where  he  lays  down  the  qualifications  of  the 
Christian  ministry,  says  not  a  word  of  any  kind  of  scrutiny, 
which  can  be  satisfied  only  by  the  testimony  of  the  party, 
concerning  himself. 

"  The  subject  being  important,  we  have  thought  it  ex- 
pedient to  make  this  formal  profession  of  our  opinion." 

When  the  alteration  of  the  proposed  canon  by  the  bish- 
ops came  into  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  it 
occasioned  a  warm  debate,  which  turned  altogether  on  the 
word  "known":  the  word  "manifested"  being  proposed  as 
a  substitute,   by  those  who   objected  to  the  other.     The( 
reason  was,  there  being  some  in  the  convention  who  could  / 
not  brook  its  being  declared  in  a  canon,  that  a  man  could  V 
no  otherwise  know  the  presence^ of  the  Spirit  of  God,  than    ' 
by  his  fruits.     They  evidently  thought  there  was  a  more 
immediate  communication  in  the  matter  at  issue;   although 
they  rested  their  objection  chiefly  on  the-supposition  of  its 
cutting  off  all  hope  from  a  dying  penitent,   as  if  such  a 
person  might  not  be  sensible  of  new  affections,  which  the 
Spirit  only  can  produce,  whatever  difference  there  may  be 
between  him  and  a  holy  liver,  as  to  the  certainty  of  those 
around  him  concerning  the  existence  of  such   affections. 


230  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Some,  without  deciding  on  which  side  the  truth  lay,  re- 
monstrated against  the  establishing  by  a  side-blow,  of 
what  they  called  a  controverted  point.  In  the  issue,  the 
amendment  of  the  bishops  was  accepted,  but  much  to  the 
dissatisfaction  of  the  dissentients,  who  even  talked  of  en- 
tering a  protest.  After  the  business  of  the  day,  two  re- 
spectable clergymen,  who  had  argued  and  voted  in  the 
majority,  privately  recommended  to  the  consideration  of 
the  two  bishops — whether  it  would  not  be  best  for  them 
to  propose  the  change  of  "known"  for  "manifested";  this 
word  not  being  opposed  to  their  belief,  although  not  so 
precisely  suited  to  the  sentiment  intended  to  be  conveyed. 
Their  motive  was  the  expectation  until  now  entertained, 
that  the  convention  would  close  the  next  day,  with  a  con- 
ciliatory spirit  on  all  sides;  which  expectation  would  be 
disappointed,  if  the  recommended  measure  should  be  re- 
jected. The  bishops,  influenced  by  the  same  motive,  com- 
plied with  the  proposal.  But  when  the  alteration  came 
into  the  other  house,  there  again  arose  a  warm  debate,  a 
considerable  proportion  arguing  against  the  acceptance  of 
the  revision.  However,  the  more  moderate  counsel  pre- 
vailed; but  whether  to  any  good  purpose,  can  be  known 
only  by  future  events.  The  transaction  is  recorded  under 
the  mortifying  reflection,  that  there  has  been  an  interfer- 
ence in  the  counsels  of  this  Church  of  the  wild  and  per- 
nicious opinion  manifested  in  this  argument. 

After  the  session  was  ended,  in  company  with  a  member 
who  had  distinguished  himself  in  the  minority,  the  author 
remarked  to  him,  that  in  the  institutions  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  there  was  nothing  like  the  opinion  which  he  seemed 
to  entertain.  He  defended  himself  by  the  Seventeenth  Ar- 
ticle, where  it  speaks  of  election  in  Christ,  as  "full  of 
sweet,  pleasant  and  unspeakable  comfort  to  godly  persons, 
and  such  as  feel  in  themselves  the  working  of  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  mortifying  the  works  of  the  flesh  and  their  earthly 
members,  and  drawing  up  their  mind  to  high  and  heavenly 
things";  words  evidently  harmonizing  with  the  position, 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  231 

(that  "by  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit  only  his  holy  influence  can 
~* — -•— ^^agp^  r  ' 

be  known"     Should  such  reasoners  obtain  the  sway  in  the 
counsels  of  this  Church,  her  system  will  be  overturned. 

The  other  matter  relative  to  the  canons,  was  what  oc- 
curred concerning  the  Office  of  Induction,  established  at  the 
last  convention.  It  is  to  be  hoped,  that  the  consequences 
of  the  measure  will  be  an  illustration  of  the  maxim,  that 
/"the  art  of  governing  consists,  in  a  great  measure,  in  not 
,  governing  too  much."  No  objection  had  been  made  to  the 
office;  but  the  requiring  of  induction  as  essential  to  a^yalid 
settlement  was  evidently  perceived  to  militate  against  the 
ideas  so  prevalent  in  many  places  of  dismissing  ministers 
at  pleasure.  Now,  although  there  can  hardly  be  any  prin- 
ciple more  evidently  hostile  to  the  permanent  respectability 
of  the  ministry,  yet  it  would  have  been  better  to  have  left 
the  correction  of  it  to  time  and  attendant  inconveniences, 
than  to  have  brought  the  full  force  of  it  into  operation  by 
the  measure  now  in  question.  Certainly  it  would  have  been 
best  to  have  rested  the  service  on  a  recommendatory  ru- 
bric. In  Maryland,  the  measure  interfered  directly  with 
the  vestry-law.  From  Carolina  there  was  a  memorial, 
desiring  an  alteration  of  the  canon.  And  in  other  places, 
complaints  were  known  to  have  been  made.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  service  and  the  result  of  it  were  with  great  rea- 
son so  acceptable  to  some,  that  they  refused  to  concur  in 
doing  away  the  former  measure,  but  consented  to  the  dis- 
fpensing  with  it  in  those  states  or  dioceses  in  which  it  in- 
terfered with  charters  or  usages.  In  this  shape,  the  matter 
was  brought  before  the  bishops,  who  were  reluctant  to  the 
saying  of  any  thing,  liable  to  be  construed  into  an  approba- 
tion of  charters  of  usages,  which  they  hold  to  be  contrary 
to  good  order  in  the  Church.  Still,  the  consequences  of 
rejecting  the  canon  were  so  stated  to  them  as  to  induce, 
on  their  part,  the  consenting  to  it:  with  a  subjoined  decla- 
ration, that  it  should  not  be  construed  as  giving  a  sanction 
to  the  charters  and  the  usages  in  contemplation,  concern- 
ing which  they  also  expressed  the  hope,  that  they  will 'in 


232  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

time  be  altered.  This  amendment  was  accepted,  and  the 
canon  passed. 

A  new  arrangement  of  the  canons  made  by  this  conven- 
tion had  been  pressed  on  every  preceding  occasion,  and 
objected  to  by  the  author,  who  at  last  withdrew  his  oppo- 
sition, submitting  to  the  alleged  advantage  of  having  all 
the  provisions  pertaining  to  the  same  subject  classed  to- 
gether. It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  course  of  conduct  will 
end  here,  at  least  for  a  considerable  time;  or  else,  in  the 
different  dioceses,  it  will  be  to  no  purpose  to  refer  to  any 
particular  canon,  because  of  the  uncertainty,  whether  it  will 
retain  its  station  after  the  next  triennial  convention.  It 
will  be  much  more  convenient  to  exhibit  the  canons  of  each 
conventional  body  as  their  act,  and  in  every  edition  of  the 
canons  to  retain  the  titles  of  such  as  are  repealed,  print- 
ing the  titles  in  italics.  A  repeal  will  be  the  result  of  the 
considerable  improvement  of  a  former  canon.  But  it  was 
obligatory  in  its  old  form,  while  it  remained  in  force,  and 
may  still  require  to  be  referred  to,  on  some  question  con- 
nected with  discipline.  The  title  will  direct  to  the  journal, 
which  will  show  how  the  canon  stood  at  the  time  to  which 
it  is  desirable  to  apply  it. 

The  journal  shows  that  there  was  accomplished  at  this 
|  .convention  what  has  been  from  the  beginning  ardently 
.  ty  desired  by  many,  both  of  the  clergy  and  of  the  laity — the 
giving  of  a  full  negative  to  the  House  of  Bishops.  It  is  to 
be  hoped,  that  the  recollection  of  the  course  of  this  busi- 
ness, as  found  on  the  various  journals,  will  show  the  pro- 
priety of  leaving  to  time  and  mature  reflection  to  effect 
what  may  be  for  a  while  opposed  by  prejudices,  not  to  be 
disregarded  without  extreme  danger.  What  is  here  said, 
however,  is  designed  of  those  prejudices  only  which  may 
be  yielded  to  without  the  sacrifice  of  essential  principle. 
This  was  the  case  in  the  present  instance,  and  must  have 
been  perceived  to  be  such,  even  by  those  who  conceive  the 
highest  of  Episcopal  claims.  In  the  year  1785,  even  the 
necessity  of  the  presidency  of  a  bishop,  when  such  a  char- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  233 

acter  should  be  obtained  by  consecration,  and  should  be 
present  in  the  convention,  was  rejected.     Still,  nothing  was   '  / 
decreed  to  the  contrary,  and  in  the  next  year,  the  absurd  >'  >  • 
prejudice  against  the  proposal  was  overruled.     When  an- 
other constitution  was  formed,  in  1789,  if  a  provision  for  r/J  0j 
the  Episcopal  negative  had  been  insisted  on,  it  would  have  s 
been  destructive  of  the  whole  system.     Nevertheless,  in  the  t 
many  years  intervening,  no  measure  has  passed,  under  the  \ 
refusal  of  the  Episcopal   sanction.     Indeed,  it  may  be  a  f 
question,  wrhether,  had  things  remained  on  the  old  footing 
of  the  three  fifths,  made  necessary  to  carry  any  resolution 
contrary  to  the  opinion  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  the  weight  I 
of  their  negative  would  not  have  had  more  effect  than  un-  u 
der  the  present  change.     This  would  have  happened  in  the  ' 
following  manner.     There  would  always  be  in  the  other 
house  a  proportion  who  would  doubt  of  the  validity  of  a 
measure  adopted  without  the  Episcopal  sanction.     Some  of 
these  would  occasionally  differ  from  the  bishops  on  a  sub- 
ject under  consideration.     But  when  the  dissent  of  the  bish- 
ops should  have  been  declared,  those  of  the  description 
referred  to  would  have  thrown  themselves  into  the  scale, 
against  the  putting  of  the  matter  to  the  test  of  the  three 
fifths.     This  supposition  has  been  verified,  in  a  transaction  ( 
which  took  place  between  the  two  houses  of  the  conven-  / 
tion  of  1804.     It  is  evident  to  the  author's  mind,  that  ow- 
ing to  the  causes  stated,  while  it  would  be  scarcely  possible 
ever  to  carry  a  measure  against  the  bishops,  there  would 
be  a  discouragement  of  even  that  free  discussion  with  them, 
which  may  be  expected  to  take  place  sometimes,  under 
their  present  full  possession  of  a  negative. 

On  the  above  subject  there  is  an  error  in  the  journal,  re- 
specting the  votes  of  the  lay  gentlemen  from  Pennsylvania.  ( 
It  is  there  said,  that  they  were  in  favor  of  the  resolution,  / 
ftut  voted  in  the  negative,  because  uninstructed  by  their  ( 
constituents.*     The  declaration  of  the  gentlemen  is,  that 

*  See  Journals  of  General  Convention  (Reprint  1861),  Vol.  I,  p.  341.    Ed. 


234  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

they  declined  voting  for  a  measure  of  which  they  approved, 
because  it  did  not  appear  from  the  journals  of  their  state 
conventions,  that  the  projected  change  had  been  laid  be- 
fore them,  as  the  constitution  has  prescribed.     Neither  had 
the  gentlemen  any  recollection  that  this  was  done.     The  \ 
author  is  persuaded  that  the  matter  was  notified  to  the  j 
state  convention;  but  how  it  happened  that  an  entry  was  \ 
omitted,  he  knows  not.* 

The  reason  of  the  bishops  for  postponing  the  considera- 
tion of  the  degrees  of  consanguinity  and  affinity  prohibiting 
marriage,  was  simply  as  stated  on  the  journal — the  weight  V 
of  the  subject,  and  the  partial  attendance  at  this  conven-y 
tion.     They  did  not  compare  their  sentiments,  on  the  many 
important  points  which  the  subject  brings  into  view. 

'  The  last  subject  had  been  brought  forward,  in  conse- 
quence of  an  instruction  from  the  Church  of  Maryland,  to 
the  deputies  from  that  State.  From  the  same  quarter  there 
was  a  proposal  made,  to  introduce  "A  Companion  to  the 
Altar,"  as  part  of  the  Prayer  Book.f  The  reason  of  the  re- 
jection of  the  proposal  by  the  bishops,  was  its  tending  to 
make  the  book  bulky.  Many  good  treatises,  may  be  use- 


*  It  would  have  been  well,  had  the  subject  recurred  so  as  to  be  brought  before 
the  convention  of  1811,  to  cause  notice  to  have  been  given  on  the  journal  of  that 
year.  But  the  fact  is  as  here  related  :  and  the  gentlemen  concerned  were  a  little 
pained,  by  the  misstatement  on  the  preceding  journal;  although  doubtless  occa- 
sioned by  misapprehension  or  by  inadvertence. 

t  Many  editions  of  the  English  Prayer  Book  had  bound  up  with  them  "A 
Companion  to  the  Altar."  It  does  not  appear  when  this  policy  was  inaugurated, 
but  it  was  continued,  probably  by  the  publishers,  on  their  own  account,  down  to 
1812,  if  not  later.  No  copy  that  we  have  seen  gives  any  clew  to  the  authorship, 
and  one  copy  has  been  shown  us  separate.  This,  clearly,  must  have  been  the 
"Companion"  referred  to  by  Bishop  White.  Bishop  Hobart's  " Companion  for 
the  Altar,"  was  published  in  1804,  yet  it  could  not  have  obtained  the  approval  of 
Bishop  White,  or  the  convention,  as  it  was  not  well  suited  for  the  intended  pnr- 
pose;  while  the  English  work,  l«ing  wholly  devotional,  and  expressing  the  aver- 
age sentiment  of  the  time,  would  meet  with  no  criticism  on  the  ground  of  utility 
in  such  a  connection.  Bishop  Hobart's  work  also  formed  a  I2mo.  of  275  pages, 
while  the  "Companion"  proposed  comprised  only  72  in  i8mo.  It  is  not  proba- 
ble that  any  one  would  propose  its  incorporation.  Ed, 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  235 

fully  bound  up  with  the  Prayer  Book:  but  to  make  them 
essential  parts  of  it,  would  be  manifestly  productive  of  much 
inconvenience.  Any  printer  may,  at  his  discretion,  do 
what  was  solicited  on  this  subject,  although  he  may  not 
notice  the  Companion  to  the  Altar  in  the  table  of  contents 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

It  appears  from  the  journal,  that  the  convention  has  en- 
deavored— and  with  propriety  as  is  here  conceived — to  give 
a  check  to  the  growing  practice  of  instituting  associated 
rectorships.  They  destroy  responsibility,  and  give  occasion 
to  rivalships  between  pastors  of  the  same  parochial  church 
or  churches.  It  is  argued  in  favor  of  Episcopacy,  that  in- 
dependently on  any  arguments  from  divine  institution  or 
from  apostolic  practice,  it  has  a  better  tendency  than  Pres- 
bytery to  peace  and  order.  The  last  argument  seems  to 
apply  with  more  weight  to  a  congregational  than  even  to 
a  diocesan.  So  far  as  the  former  connection,  in  other  de- 
nominations, has  been  known  in  any  considerable  degree, 
to  the  writer  of  these  remarks,  it  has  been  generally  an 
illustration  of  the  opinion  here  expressed.  He  recollects 
reading  in  the  works  of  the  celebrated  Richard  Baxter, 
that  during  the  prostration  of  Episcopacy  in  England,  the 
pressing  instances  of  that  good  man — for  such  he  is  here 
conceived  to  have  been — for  the  increasing  of  the  number 
of  pastors  in  the  churches,  were  defeated  by  the  experience 
of  the  jealousies  constantly  occurring,  where  more  than  one 
pastor  was  settled  in  any  church.  This  is  in  a  work  called, 
"  The  Reformed  Pastor,"  abridged  by  S.  Palmer,  part  ii., 
chap.  9. 

At  this  convention,  the  bishops  were  again  assailed  by  / 
the  troublesome  business  of  Amrrii  Rogers,  who  affected  I 
to  bring  before  them  an  appeal  from  the  judgment  of 
Bishop  Jarvis  and  the  clergy  of  Connecticut.  There  was 
no  doubt  on  the  minds  of  the  two  bishops  present,  that 
there  had  been  an  oversight  in  not  granting  to  this  man  a 
trial,  in  the  Church  in  that  State.  But  the  oversight,  if 
they  were  correct  in  supposing  one, .was  not  theirs,  nor  was 


236  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

it  in  their  power  to  correct  it.     Nothing  could  have  been 
easier,  than  the  convicting  of  him  of  faults,  which  deserved 
degradation.     But  it  did  not  become  the  bishops  to  advise 
the  recalling  of  the  act,   and  the  giving  of  him  a  trial. 
/  There  was  the  less  call  on  the  author  to  do  so,  because  he 
\  had  already  advised  this  very  measure,  as  did  also  Bishop 
>'i   Moore,  on  an  application   made  for  their  opinions  on  the 
'ff  subject,  by  the  standing  committee  of  the  Church  in  Con- 
)  necticut.     But  although  their  opinions  had  been  asked  and 
given,  there  occurred  insuperable  difficulty  in  the  seeking 
of  a  compliance  with  them.     The  bishops  had  no  confer- 
ence with  Rogers,  nor  would  they  have  noticed  his  busi- 
ness, had  he  not  employed  a  gentleman  of  reputation  in 
the   law,   to  whom   something  was   due   on    the   score  of 
politeness  and  respect.     They  spent  a  whole  morning  in 
discussing  the  matter  with  this  gentleman,  but  persisted  in 
declining  to  hear  his  pleadings,  because  not  competent  to 
decide.     The  grounds  of  the  treatment  of  Rogers  by  the 
House  of  Bishops,  at  the  last  convention  and  at  the  pres- 
ent, were  accurately  recorded  on  the  journals.     The  other 
house  properly  refused  to  intermeddle,  and  the  only  reason 
of  the  papers  being  sent  to  them  by  the  bishops,  was  their 
being  addressed  to  both. 

On  the  subject  of  the  Hymns  sanctioned  by  this  con- 
vention, much  was  said,  as  well  out  of  doors  as  in  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.  Some  members  of 
that  body  had  contemplated  the  matter  previously  to  the 
meeting,  and  had  pressed  it  with  great  earnestness.  The 
author  of  these  remarks  acknowledges,  that  it  was  with 
pain  he  saw  the  subject  brought  forward.  This  was  not 
because  he  doubted  either  of  the  lawfulness  of  celebrating 
the  praises  of  God  in  other  strains  than  those  of  David,  or 
of  the  expediency  of  having  a  few  well  selected  hymns  for 
the  especial  subjects  of  the  evangelical  economy,  which  can 
no  otherwise  be  celebrated  in  the  Psalms,  than  in  an  ac- 

\/  commodated  sense.  Nevertheless,  there  is  solittle  of  good  j 
I  poetry  except  the  Scriptural,  on  sacred  subjectsTand  Tnere  / 
\  r  ' •"*---  — ^ i. —  * 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  237 

was  so  great  danger  of  having  a  selection  accommodated  to 
the  degree  of  animal  sensibility,  affected  by  those  who 
were  the  most  zealous  in  the  measure,  that  the  discre- 
tion of  adopting  it  seemed  questionable.  It  was,  however, 
yielded  to  by  the  bishops,  under  the  hope,  that  the  selec- 
tion of  a  few  and  those  unexceptionable,  although  some  of 
them,  perhaps,  are  not  to  be  extolled  for  the  excellence 
either  of  the  sentiments  or  of  the  poetry,  might  prevent  the  ) 
unauthorized  use  of  compositions  which  mj  rational  Chris-  / 
tian  can  approve  of.  The  matter,  however,  was  executed 
with  too  much  haste.  The  bishops  had  merely  time  to  give 
a  cursory  reading  to  the  hymns  proposed,  the  result  of  which 
was  the  acceptance  of  them,  with  the  exception  of  one 
hymn,  containing  a  verse  that  seemed  a  little  enthusiastic. 
In  lieu  of  this  they  proposed  another  hymn,  which  was  ad- 
mitted. Those  who  were  the  most  zealous  for  the  meas- 
ure had  pressed  for  the  admission  of  about  two  hundred. 

On  the  subject  of  hymns,  there  is  ground  for  considera- 
ble apprehension.  Some  ministers,  and  other  members  of 
this  Church,  have  so  strong  an  inclination  to  multiply  them, 
that,  whatever  might  be  in  future  the  number  of  those  al- 
lowed, there  would  be  at  every  convention  a  wish  for  more. 
Others  are  aware  of  the  inconvenience  of  this  continual 
enlargement,  but  press  for  the  setting  aside  of  some  of 
those  selected,  in  order  to  introduce  new  ones  more  suited 
to  their  taste;  not  foreseeing,  that  on  the  same  principle, 
there  will  be,  in  the  next  convention,  new  proposers  of  new 
hymns,  and  that  this  will  happen  without  end.  There  are 
some  religious  societies,  who  think  it  ungodly  to  introduce 
into  the  worship  of  the  sanctuary  any  other  singing  than 
that  of  the  Psalms  of  David.  This  is  unreasonable,  but  are  / 
we  not  running  into  the  opposite  extreme  ? 

The  principles  which  prevail  in  the  estimation  of  the 
author,  and  which  he  proposes  under  subjection  to  the  say- 
ing— "  valeant  quantum  possunt  valere" — that  is,  let  them 
pass  for  what  they  are  worth — are  these. 

In  regard  to  the  general  subjects  of  psalmody,  as  the 


238  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

attributes  of  God,  the  mercies  of  creation  and  of  providence, 
and  what  comes  under  the  character  of  preceptive,  or  un- 
der that  of  devout  desire  and  pious  purpose,  he  knows  of  no 
other  compositions  which  have  proved  equally  interesting 
to  his  mind;  and  without  making  his  feelings  a  test  of  those 
of  other  persons,  he  can  not  forget,  that  these  compositions 
were  the  Liturgy  of  the  Jewish  Church,  when  its  devotions 
were  joined  in  by  the  divine  Author  of  our  religion.  It  is 
no  small  a'rgument  in  favor  of  the  heavenly  origin  of  the 
Old  Testament,  that  strains  of  devotion,  so  far  excelling 
whatever  the  world  knows  of  prayer  practised  by  the  wis- 
est men  among  the  heathen,  should  adorn  the  worship  of  a 
people  far  below  some  other  nations  in  the  .^cultivation,  of 
the  human  intellect.  It  should  be  added,  that  there  is  no 
small  proportion  of  the  Psalms,  so  evidently  pointing  to 
the  Messiah  and  His  spiritual  kingdom,  as  only  to  require 
acquaintance  with  the  contents  of  the  New  Testament,  in 
order  to  their  being  accommodated  to  the  celebration  of 
the  mercies  of  redemption. 

Nevertheless,  as  it  is  by  the  Gospel  that  "life  and  im- 
mortality are  brought  to  light,"  there  would  seem  to  be  a 
suitableness  to  its  high  design,  in  celebrating  its  prominent 
subjects  in  definite  terms;  so  that  the  Nativity,  the  Cruci-  | 
fixion,  the  Resurrection,  the  Ascension,  the  descent  of  the  ', 
Holy  Ghost  at  Pentecost,  and  other  edifying  events,  em- 
bodied with  Christian  doctrine  and  essential   to   it,   may; 
reasonably  be  rendered  the  more  impressive,  by  their  being  '' 
carried  to  the  heart  on  the  wings  of  poetry  and  of  music.       ( 

It  is  not  intended  to  allege,  that  we  are  to  stop  here. 
But  there  is  no  hesitation  to  confess,  that  additions,  if 
made,  should  be  with  a  sparing  hand,  and  then  only  ad-  j 
mitted,  when  besides  sound  doctrine  and  weighty  sense, 
the  composition  be  such,  as  a  poet  of  acknowledged  genius 
would  not  be  ashamed  to  own. 

As  to  the  loading  of  our  book  with  the  same  truths  in  a 
diversity  of  language  and  of  metre,  or,  in  any  other  way, 
the  seeking  of  variety  for  its  own  sake,  there  is  pleasure  ia 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS,  239 

recording  the  opinion,  that  it  will  never  tend  to  the  sus- 
taining either  of  truth  or  of  devotion.  When  devout  feel- 
ings have  often  accompanied  certain  words,  the  one  bring 
the  other  along  with  them  by  the  law  of  association.  This 
should  be  no  hindrance  to  as  much  variety  as  is  suited  to 
the  diversity  of  subject,  yet  it  discountenances  variety, 
admitted  for  the  gratification  of  restless  fancy.  As  to  that 
species  of  hymns,  which  affects  to  clothe  devout  desire  in 
the  language  of  human  passion,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  that  we 
shall  continue  to  repel  every  effort  for  their  admission. 

One  effect  of  gratifying  the  passion  for  a  continued  addi- 
tion to  the  number  of  hymns,  and  for  expressing  the  same 
sentiments  in  a  variety  of  forms,  would  be  the  swelling  of 
the  Prayer  Book  to  an  immoderate  size.  Again,  the  prob- 
able effect  of  this,  would  be  the  sometimes  editing  of  the 
book  without  either  hymns  or  metre  psalms  under  the 
same  cover,  as  may  be  done  at  any  time  without  offence 
against  any  existing  regulation,  since  they  are  no  parts  of 
the  said  book,  but  make  a  book  by  themselves.  Accord- 
ingly, selections  from  it  may  be  made  by  any  parochial 
minister,  at  his  discretion;  and  either  be  bound  with  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  or  kept  in  a  separate  manual  for 
the  use  of  his  congregation,  and  of  others  to  whom  it  may 
be  eligible.  Something  like  the  latter  the  author  has  seen 
in  sundry  churches  in  England;  in  which  all  the  metrical 
compositions  in  use  are  on  a  large  sheet  of  pasteboard,  and 
kept  hanging  in  the  pews. 

It  may  be  proper,  to  guard  the  above  from  being  so  mis- 
construed, as  to  be  a  sanction  for  the  publishing  of  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  with  the  omission  of  any  portion 
of  it,  properly  coming  under  any  head  of  the  table  of  con- 
tents. This  was  done  in  a  former  day,  by  an  omission  of 
the  book  of  Psalms,  and  an  insertion  of  the  selections  only: 
which  unauthorized  act,  being  made  known  to  the  conven- 
tion of  1801,  produced  the  canon  now  numbered  as  the 
Forty-third,  "  Prescribing  the  Mode  of  publishing  author- 
ized Editions  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,"  etc.  But 


240  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

"The  Articles  of  Religion,"  and  "The  Ordinal,"  are  each 
of  them  a>distinct_book,  although  resting  on  the  same  au- 
thority; so  that  "The^Bpok  of  Common  Prayer,"  with  or 

without  them,  may  be  complete. 
— -/      .  Jf — • .   *. — 

The  subject  of  hymns  has  so  evidently  a  bearing  on  that 
of  the  Psalms,  that  it  will  not  be  irrelevant,  and  will  be  jus- 
tified by  the  liberty  which  the  author  stipulated  for  in  the 
preface,  to  give  the  outlines  of  his  theory  concerning  the 
latter.  It  has  produced  some  variety  of  opinion,  although 
not  in  any  such  extent  as  to  endanger  the  peace  of  our 
churches. 

In  the  primitive  Church,  says  the  learned  Bingham,  "the 
joining  of  all  the  worshippers  in  the  psalmody  was  the 
most  ancient  and  general  practice,  till  the  way  of  alternate 
psalmody  was  brought  into  the  Church."  May  every  at- 
tempt to  supersede  the  former,  by  an  exclusive  method, 
prove  abortive. 

Is  there,  then,  to  be  interdicted  a  higher  grade  of  mu- 
sical performance,  calling  for  acquirements  of  more  study, 
and  confined  to  the  select  members  of  a  choir  ?     Far  from 
us  be  the  opinion,  that  there  should  be  wanting  any  matter 
which  can  help  to  swell  the  notes  of  Christian  praise;  and, 
that  all  improvement  in  this  line  should  be  surrendered  to 
mere  amusement  and  to  licentiousness;  but,  let  it  be  admit- 
ted on  the  indispensable  condition,  of  subserviency  to  the 
worship  of  Him,  who  so  framed  the  ear  as  to  be  delighted 
by  melody  and  by  harmony,  and  especially,  rather  than  the 
permission  of  a  contrariety  to  that  end  in  sounds  character- 
ized by  levity,  let  it  be  kept  at  a  distance  from  the  sacred 
enclosure  of  the  house  of  God.     The  same  reason  applies 
to  the  aid  of  instruments.     They  may  contribute  to  the  ef-\/ 
feet  of  sentiment  and  of  voice,  but  when  there  are  emitted  «•/ 
from  them  sounds  hostile  to  every  devout  desire,  there  is^y 
no  person  impressed  by  a  serious  sense  of  the  duties  of  the   \/ 
place,  who  would. not  rather  see  them  committed  to  the/ 
flames. 

It  is  stated  by  Bishop  Lowth,  in  his  dissertation  prefixed 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  241 

to  his  translation  of  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  that  the  book 
of  Psalms  was  originally  in  metre.  He  considers  the  fact 
as  proved  by  certain  parts  of  them,  in  which  there  are 
alphabetical  marks  of  the  beginnings  of  lines  and  of  stanzas. 
To  the  same  purpose  Josephus  affirms,  that  David  wrote 
his  Psalms  in  trimeters  and  pentameters. 

This  metre  was  not  of  the  same  number  of  syllables,  as 
among  the  Greeks  and  the  Latins;  but,  to  use  the  words  of 
the  bishop,  "that  relation  and  proportion  of  one  verse  to 
another,  which  arises  from  the  correspondence  of  terms, 
and  from  the  form  of  construction,  from  whence  results  a 
rythmus  of  propositions,  and  a  harmony  of  sentences." 

The  pronunciation  of  the  Hebrew  language  had  become 
lost,  long  before  the  age  of  the  Gospel,  principally  in  con- 
sequence of  its  want  of  vowels,  so  that  the  subsequent  in- 
vention of  vowels  by  the  Masorets,  has  never  recovered  the 
pronunciation  with  certainty.  Hence,  the  original  metre 
is  unknown,  and  even  in  the  age  of  the  Gospel,  the  worship 
of  the  temple  was  with  the  psalms  in  the  prosaic  form. 

The  chanting  of  them  in  this  form,  will  forever  claim 
the  merit  of  their  having  been  so  sung,  in  the  worship 
attended  on  by  our  blessed  Saviour  and  His  apostles;  and 
of  their  having  continued  to  be  so  sung,  in  the  primitive 
Church,  and  afterwards  universally  until  the  reformation. 
In  the  compiling  of  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England, 
no  metrical  singing  was  contemplated:  so  that  when  Stern- 
hold  and  Hopkins  made  their  version  it  came  in  silently, 
under  the  general  license  to  sing  any  portion  of  Scripture. 
To  this  day  in  England,  it  is  only  under  the  cover  of  the 
said  permission,  that  either  the  said  version,  or  the  more 
poetic  version  of  Tate  and  Brady  shelters  itself.  In  the  j 
American  Church,  the  latter  is  expressly  sanctioned. 

How  can  the  sanction  be  reasonably  censured,  as  treating 
the  words  of  Scripture  irreverently  ?  For  the  singing  of 
the  psalms  in  the  original,  none  contend,  and  as  for  the 
original  measure,  the  recovery  of  it  is  given  up  as  desperate. 
To  render  them  intelligible  in  any  modern  language,  it  is 


242  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

necessary  to  accommodate  in  a  considerable  degree  to  the 
genius  of  it.  If  the  accommodation  be  a  little  extended  for 
the  making  of  poetic  measure,  it  can  not  be  unlawful  in  its 
principle,  provided  the  sense  be  faithfully  preserved.  The 
same  license  is  often  taken  in  choral  music,  it  being  com- 
mon to  make  transpositions  and  other  alterations  of  the 
words  of  anthems,  although  not  for  the  purpose  of  tying 
them  to  metre.  But  the  license  pleaded  for  is  denounced 
as  a  gratifying  of  sense,  and  there  is  an  opprobrium  at  hand, 
in  the  expression  of  a  tickling  of  the  ear.  What  is  the  "se 
of  any  poetry,  or  of  any  music,  but  that  through  the  inlets 
of  the  gratified  senses,  there  may  be  an  excitement  of 
devout  affections  ?  Were  it  not  for  this  advantage,  it 
were  better,  that  divine  truths  should  be  always  uttered 
in  the  plainness  of  a  dress  suited  to  mathematics  or  to 
metaphysics. 

It  has  been  remarked,  that  in  England,  metrical  psalm- 
ody has  been  instrumental  to  schism,  having  been  always 
the  most  esteemed  by  the  Dissenters  from  the  established 
Church.  It  is  difficult  to  perceive  either  the  relation  of 
the  subject,  or  the  evidence  of  the  position.  In  regard  to 
the  latter,  it  is  notorious,  that  metrical  singing  made  its 
way  not  only  to  the  parish  churches,  but  to  the  cathedrals, 
without  the  sanction  of  command,  or  even  of  especial  per- 
mission; and  that  it  retains  its  stand  in  them  under  a 
provision  which  had  it  not  in  contemplation.  If  the  Dis- 
senters have  not  manifested  the  same  regard  for  a  higher 
grade  of  singing,  it  should  be  remembered,  that  at  their 
origin,  there  was  an  ideal  association  of  this  with  other 
matters;  that  it  has  been  hereditary,  and  that  we  know 
not  how  far  this  may  have  been  the  result  of  another  asso- 
ciation— meaning  of  the  subject  with  the  supposed  attribute 
of  levity,  for  which  too  much  cause  has  been  given  in  faulty 
performance. 

As  to  the  churches  of  the  Establishment,  it  is  probable 
that  there  is  not  one  of  them  in  which  metrical  singing  is 
not  practiced,  although  any  parochial  clergyman  might 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  243 

banish  it,  without  offence  against  any  institution  of  his 
Church. 

The  gratifying  of  popular  taste  by  the  use  of  metre  has 
been  urged  to  its  disgrace.  Now  to  sacrifice  truth  to  the 
opinion  of  the  high  or  of  the  low,  must  be  grievous  sin. 
But  on  a  question  of  taste,  if  that  of  the  people  can  be  laid 
hold  on  for  the  increase  of  their  piety,  it  would  be  difficult 
.  to  prove  this  an  error;  as  much  so,  as  to  do  the  like  in 
reference  to  the  improvement  of  a  talent  for  elocution,  with 
the  hope  of  rendering  it  instrumental  to  popular  edification. 

After  all,  it  must  be  acknowledged  of  our  metre,  requir- 
ing as  it  does  lines  answering  to  one  another  in  the  num- 
bers of  their  syllables,  that  it  is  very  unequal  to  the  force 
of  what  must  have  been  accomplished  by  Hebrew  verse,  as 
described  by  Bishop  Lowth,  according  to  which,  each  line 
contained  a  complete  sense.  He  calls  the  lines  parallel- 
isms, and  he  distinguishes  them  into — the  synonymous,  the 
antithetic,  and  the  synthetic  or  consecutive.  These  names 
are  descriptive  of  the  diversity,  and  the  examples  given  by 
him  are  proof,  how  exceedingly  all  our  translations  in  me- 
tre fall  short  of  those  poems  in  their  original  forms.* 

*  In  order  to  illustrate  the  sense  of  the  Bishop  concerning  parallelisms,  the 
following  examples  are  given  from  among  those  exhibited  by  him:  — 

THE  SYNONYMOUS. 

"  Bow  thy  heavens,  O  Jehovah,  and  descend ; 
Touch  the  mountains,  and  they  shall  smoke  : 
Dart  forth  lightning,  and  scatter  them  ; 
Shoot  out  thine  arrows,  and  destroy  them." 

Psalm  cxliv.  5,  6. 

THE  ANTITHETIC. 

"  They  are  bowed  down,  and  fallen  , 
But  we  are  risen,  and  maintain  ourselves  firm." 

Psalm  xx.  8. 

"  For  His  wrath  is  but  for  a  moment,  His  favor  for  life  ; 
Sorrow  may  lodge  for  the  evening,  but  in  the  morning  gladness." 

Psalm  xxx.  5. 

The  Antithesis  is  in  each  of  the  lines.  Sometimes  it  comprehends  a  couplet, 
each  line  having  a  complete  sense. 


244  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

As  to  what  is  commonly  called  rhyme,  in  which  the 
lines  answer  to  one  another,  not  only  in  the  number  of 
syllables,  but  in  sound  or  jingle,  if,  as  is  alleged,  there  is 
something  in  the  genius  of  the  English  language,  render- 
ing such  an  artificial  construction  peculiarly  agreeable,  it  is 
difficult  to  devise  any  principle  on  which  it  should  be  inter- 
dicted. And  yet,  the  opinion  here  entertained  is,  that  the 
most  to  be  claimed  for  it  is  endurance,  until  there  shall  be 
exhibited  a  translation  stripped  of  it,  and  in  other  respects 
worthy  of  adoption.  Certainly,  there  are  psalms  which 
have  never  been  put  into  this  chain,  nor  perhaps  into 
that  of  syllabic  measure,  without  material  deterioration. 

In  regard  both  to  metre  and  to  rhyme  it  must  be  con- 
fessed, that  sometimes  by  the  throwing  in  of  a  superfluous 
word,  to  suit  that  species  of  translation,  there  is  caused  a 
considerable  departure  from  the  original.  Besides,  there 
is  commonly  a  suspending  of  the  sense  of  one  line  on  what 
is  to  follow  in  another:  which  is  contrary  to  the  example 
of  Hebrew  verse.*  In  addition  to  all  this,  it  is  often  ne- 
cessary to  take  in  so  much  of  what  has  been  suggested  by 

THE  SYNTHETIC,  OR  CONSECUTIVE. 

"  Whatsoever  Jehovah  pleaseth, 

*  That  doeth  He  in  the  heavens  and  in  the  earth  ; 

In  the  sea  and  in  all  the  deeps  : 

Causing  the  vapors  to  ascend  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  ; 

Making  the  lightnings  with  the  rain  ; 

Bringing  forth  the  wind  out  of  His  treasures." 

Psalm  cxxxv.  6,  7. 

•  The  difference  may  be  illustrated,  by  the  following  lines  from  the  Fourth 
Psalm.  In  the  tirst  line,  the  sense  is  suspended  for  the  second:  and  in  the  third, 
the  same  is  done,  in  a  dependence  on  the  fourth,  a  disadvantage  sometimes  aggra- 
vated by  an  absurd  flourish  on  the  organ.  But  in  the  other  four  lines,  what  the 
Bishop  calls  a  consecutive  parallelism  is  complete,  and  remarkably  beautiful. 

"  3.  Consider  that  the  righteous  man 
Is  God's  peculiar  choice. 
And  when  to  Him  I  make  my  prayer, 
He  always  hears  my  voice. 

"4.  Then  stand  in  awe  of  His  commands. 
Flee  every  thing  that's  ill  : 
Commune  in  private  with  your  hearts. 
And  bend  them  to  His  will." 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  245 

the  brain  of  the  modern  poet,  as  that  the  sentiment  of  in- 
spiration is  diluted  in  the  exuberance  of  language,  and  sus- 
tains a  material  diminution  of  its  strength.* 

There  arises  the  question — What  is  the  line  of  conduct 
to  be  pursued  in  this  Church,  in  consideration  of  the  prem- 
ises ?  The  answer  is,  first,  in  regard  to  chants,  if  there  be 
any  who  have  a  disrelish  for  them,  let  such  persons  be 
aware  of  the  high  sanction  under  which  they  have  come 
down  to  us;  and  on  that  account,  let  them  not  dare  to 
make  an  effort  for  the  excluding  of  them.f  Secondly,  in 

*  The  two  following  examples  are  given  from  a  comparison  of  the  Bible  trans- 
lation with  that  of  the  book  in  metre.  The  lines  of  the  latter  are  fine,  which 
make  them  serve  the  better  for  instances  of  the  extending  of  a  sentiment  over  too 
large  a  surface. 

The  comparisons  to  be  made  are  not  intended  in  disparagement  of  the  version 
of  Tate  and  Brady:  for  whether  on  account  of  its  merits,  or  from  the  influence  of 
the  recollection  of  sensibilities,  extending  as  far  back  as  any  recollections  extend, 
there  is  a  preference  of  it  to  every  other  of  the  kind.  The  imperfections  charged 
on  it  are  common  to  all  the  metrical  translations. 

BIBLE  TRANSLATION.    Psalm  cxiv.  i,  2. 

"When  Israel  went  out  of  Egypt,  the  house  of  Jacob  from  a  people  of  strange 
language;  Judah  was  His  sanctuary,  and  Israel  His  dominion." 

BOOK  IN  METRE. 

"  When  Israel,  by  the  Almighty  led, 
Enrich'd  with  their  oppressor's  spoil, 
From  Egypt  march'd,  and  Jacob's  seed 
From  bondage  in  a  foreign  soil ; 
Jehovah,  for  His  residence, 
Chose  out  imperial  Judah's  tent, 
His  mansion  royal,  and  from  thence, 
Through  Israel's  camp  His  orders  sent." 

BIBLE  TRANSLATION.    Psalm  cxxxvii.  r. 

"  By  the  rivers  of  Babylon,  there  we  sat  down,  yea,  we  wept,  when  we  re- 
membered Zion." 

BOOK  IN  METRE. 

When  we  our  weary  limbs  to  rest, 
Sat  down  by  proud  Euphrates'  stream, 
We  wept,  with  doleful  thoughts  opprest, 
And  Sion  was  our  mournful  theme." 

The  whole  of  these  two  psalms  are  an  illustration  to  the  purpose. 

f  There  is  an  advantage  incidental  to  chants,  and  worthy  of  notice :  it  is  the 
exclusion  of  light  airs,  which,  tacked  to  the  plain  words  of  Scripture,  would  be 
offensive,  not  to  say  to  every  pious,  but  to  every  decent  person.  There  are  some 


246  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

regard  to  psalms  in  metre,  rendered  by  habit  dear  to  many 
devout  minds,  and  there  being  in  the  use  of  them,  a  readi- 
ness to  the  desirable  object  of  a  general  joining  of  the  peo- 
ple, let  not  the  taste  for  a  species  of  singing  which  requires 
more  of  science,  invade  the  ground  on  which  they  stand. 
And  thirdly,  let  not  that  high  grade  of  choral  praise  be  un- 
distinguishingly  rejected  by  those  who  have  no  fancy  for  it. 
Rather  let  it  be  encouraged  with  moderation,  under  the 
condition  rigorously  required,  not  only  of  there  being  noth- 
ing of  levity,  but  of  there  being  a  tendency  to  the  excite- 
ment of  devout  affections.  And  let  the  advocates  of  it  be 
aware  of  the  disgust  which  will  and  ought  to  be  excited 
by  a  violation  of  this  condition,  and  of  the  dissatisfaction 
which  will  be  the  reasonable  result  even  of  a  defect  of  skill 
in  the  performance. 

It  is  probable  that  the  chants,  the  metre  psalms,  and 
the  choral  anthems,  might  all  be  profitably  laid  aside,  in 
the  event  of  an  approach  in  the  English  language,  to  He- 
brew verse,  as  above  described  by  Bishop  Lowth,  and  of 
which  he  says  in  another  part  of  his  dissertation,  that  the 
harmony  of  it  arose  "  from  accents,  tones,  and  musical 
modulations."  But  the  Bishop  evidently  considered  this 
as  unattainable  even  in  the  Hebrew. 

On  a  retrospect  of  the  transactions  of  this  convention, 

there  is  entertained  the  trust,  that  it  did  not  end  without  a 

general  tendency  to  consolidate  the  communion;  although, 

i  in  the  course  of  the  business,  there  had  been  displayed 

,   more  than  in  any  other  convention,  the  influence  of  some 

notions  leading  far  wide  of  that  rational  devotion,  which 


religious  people — it  is  surprising — who  would  introduce  into  metre  psalmody,  the 
fashionable  tunes  of  festivity  and  sport.  The  reason  offered  is — why  should  the 
best  tunes  be  exclusively  the  property  of  Satan  ?  The  author  is  m>t  prepared  to 
pass  such  a  judgment  on  those  tunes,  which  are  not  sinful,  so  long  as  they  are 
used  within  the  bounds  of  innocency.  But  if  they  be  indeed  the  property  of  the 
aforesaid  personage,  let  us  be  just  even  to  him,  and  permit  him  to  keep  his  own. 
Rational  and  evangelical  devotion  has  no  occasion  for  them,  however  suited  they 
may  be  to  the  extravagances  of  enthusiasm. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  247 

this  Church  has  inherited  from  the  Church  of  England. 
The  spirit  here  complained  of  was  rather  moderated  than 
raised  higher  during  the  session.  But  it  being  liable  to  be 
combined  with  schemes  of  personal  consequence,  there  is 
no  foreseeing  to  what  lengths  it  may  extend  in  future.  On 
the  part  of  those  inimical  to  the  contemplated  evil,  the 
proper  preservative — and  may  God  grant  that  it  may  be 
applied — is  the  cultivating  of  an  enlightened  zeal  in  favor 
of  the  doctrines  of  our  holy  religion,  as  revealed  in  Script- 
ure, and  hitherto  maintained  in  their  integrity  by  this 
Church.* 


Q.     Page  37.     Of  the  Convention  in  1811. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Wilkins  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Dep- 
uties. The  Secretaries  of  the  two  houses,  were  the  Rev. 
Philo  Shelton,  of  the  former,  and  the  Rev.-  Ashbel  Baldwin, 
of  the  latter.  Bishop  Claggett,  who  was  to  have  opened 
this  convention  with  a  sermon,  being  detained  by  sickness, 
that  office  was  performed  by  the  presiding  bishop. 

This  convention  was  held  under  very  serious  and  well 
founded  apprehensions,  that  the  American  Church  would 
be  subjected  again  to  the  necessity  of  having  recourse  to 
the  mother  Church,  for  the  Episcopacy,  or  else  of  continu- 
ing it  without  requiring  the  canonical  number,  which  might 
be  productive  of  great  disorder  in  future.     Bishop  Moore  \ 
had  been  lately  visited  by  a  paralytic  stroke,  a"r73"  was  sup-  ) 
posed  to  be  incompetent  to  the  joining  in  a  consecration/ 


*  Lest  what  is  said  concerning  schemes  of  personal  consequence  should  bear 
the  appearance  of  an  insinuation  not  to  be  sustained  by  any  fact,  the  author  finds 
himself  called  on  to  specify  an  attempt  made  to  congregate  some  select  clergymen 
in  Baltimore,  at  the  time  of  the  General  Convention,  as  a  distinct  body,  and  for 
the  greater  increase  of  piety.  The  tendency  of  such  a  scheme  must  be  obvious. 
Almost  all  of  the  invited  clergymen  saw  the  matter  in  a  proper  point  of  view,  and 
declined  the  invitation.  The  consequence  was,  that  the  project  came  to  nothing. 


248  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

unless  in  his  chamber,  which  was  contemplated  as  the  last 
resort.  Bishop  Claggett,  after  severe  indisposition,  was 
so  far  recovered  as  to  be  encouraged  to  attempt  the  jour- 
ney; but  after  proceeding  a  few  miles,  found  himself  under 
the  necessity  of  returning.  Bishop  Madison  thought  him- 
self not  at  liberty  to  leave  the  duties  of  his  college.*  The 
author  left  home,  under  the  hope  of  inducing  Bishop  Pro- 
voost  to  go  on  to  New  Haven;  although  he  had  never  per- 
formed any  ecclesiastical  duty,  since  the  consecration  of 
Bishop  Moore,  in  1801.  But  besides  Bishop  Provoost's 
being  under  the  effects  of  a  slight  stroke  of  the  paralytic, 
sustained  two  years  before,  he  was,  at  this  time,  only  be- 
ginning to  recover  from  the  jaundice.  He  found  himself 
utterly  incompetent  to  the  taking  of  a  journey,  but  prom- 
ised, if  possible,  to  assist  in  a  consecration,  if  it  should  be 
held  in  the  City  of  New  York.  With  the  expectation  of 
this,  Bishop  Jarvis,  after  the  rising  of  the  convention,  came 
with  the  author  to  the  said  city,  as  did  the  two  bishops- 
elect.  To  the  last  hour,  there  was  danger  of  disappoint- 
ment. On  our  arrival,  a  day  ateo  having  been  publicly 
notified  for  the  consecration,  we  found  that  Bishop  Pro- 
vbost  had  suffered  a  relapse  during  our  absence.  But 
finally,  he  found  himself  strong  enough  to  give  his  at- 
tendance; and  thus,  the  business  was  happily  accomplished. 
What  is  mentioned  on  the  journals,  in  relation  to  the 
introduction  of  Episcopacy  into  the  western  states,  arose 
from  a  correspondence  which  had  been  entered  into  be- 
tween the  author  and  the  Rev.  Joseph  Doddridge,  who  had 
been  ordained  by  him  many  years  before;  and  who  lived 
near  the  western  line  of  Pennsylvania,  which  divides  it 
from  Virginia.  This  gentleman  wrote  in  behalf  of  himself, 
and  of  a  few  other  clergymen  settled  in  those  western  re- 
gions. The  line  of  direction  given  to  this  business  by  the 
convention  renders  it  premature  to  say  much  concerning 


•  It  appears  from  a  letter  of  Bishop  Madison  to  the  author,  that  these  duties 
had  been  made  the  more  imperative  by  the  solemnity  of  an  oath. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  249 

it  at  present.  The  hindrances  to  the  carrying  of  the  de- 
sign of  the  preceding  General  Convention  into  effect,  were 
the  difficulty  of  selecting  a  suitable  person,  and  that  of 
supporting  him.  The  same  difficulties  are  to  be  appre- 
hended in  the  new  shape  of  the  business.  There  is  this 
difference  in  the  two  designs.  According  to  the  former, 
the  bishop  would  have  been  on  the  missionary  plan,  se- 
lected and  paid  on  this  side  of  the  mountains.  If  the  latter 
idea  should  be  realized,  the  churches  to  the  westward  must 
be  organized,  and  a  bishop  must  be  chosen  by  themselves. 

It  appears  on  the  journal,  that  the  convention  were 
called  on  to  give  their  sanction  to  the  endeavors  of  the 
Episcopalians  in  Connecticut,  for  the  establishment  of  an 
Episcopal  Academy  with  corporate  powers.  This  design 
originated  in  the  exclusive  constitution  of  the  college  in 
that  state,  which  is  entirely  in  the  hands  of  Congregation- 
alists,  and  is  so  patronized  by  the  government,  and  so  sup- 
plied with  occasional  grants  of  money  frorn_Jhe  treasury,  as 
is  thought  to  amount  to  a  species  of  state  establishment 
of  a  particular  religious  denomination.  It  is  considerably 
owing  to  this  circumstance,  that  there  is  a  degree  of  dis- 
satisfaction between  the  Episcopalians  and  the  dominant 
society,  beyond  what  prevails  in  any  other  state  in  the 
union. 

The  application  to  the  Society  (in  England)  for  the  Prop- 
agation of  the  Gospel,  originated  in  the  following  circum- 
stances. Before  the  revolution,  and  when  the  state  now 
known  by  the  name  of  Vermont,  was  considered  as  part  of 
the  province  of  New  Hampshire,  Governor  Wentworth,  in 
his  grants  of  the  western  lands  of  that  province,  laid  out  in 
every  township  a  tract  for  the  use  of  the  Episcopal  Church, 
which  should  in  future  be  within  the  limits  of  the  township, 
and  conveyed  the  lands  so  given  to  the  said  society.  Some 
of  these  lands  are  within  the  present  bounds  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, and  the  rest  are  in  Vermont.  After  the  peace  of 
1783,  the  Society  conveyed  the  former  to  certain  gentle- 
men, within  the  state  to  which  they  belonged.  The  pres- 


250  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

ent  application,  for  a  similar  grant  of  the  lands  in  Vermont, 
was  with  the  view  of  making  them  productive,  for  the  ac- 
complishing of  the  original  object  of  the  grants. 

It  appears  further  on  the  journal,  that  two  Rev.  gentle- 
men, Benjamin  Benham,  and  Virgil  H.  Barber,  made  to 
the  convention  an  application,  the  purport  of  which  is  not 
recorded,  but  became  an  object  of  attention  in  conver- 
sation, during  and  after  the  session,  besides  its  occasioning 
of  a  debate  at  the  time,  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies.  The  subject  is  contemplated  as  likely  to  be  a 
cause  of  future  litigation,  and  therefore  now  noticed  with 
sorrow.  The  object  of  the  two  gentlemen  alluded  to,  was  A 
to  procure  a  declaration  of  the  invalidity  of  lay  baptism;-^ 
and  they  were  said  to  be  conscientiously  scrupulous  of  ad- 
mitting as  members  of  their  congregations,  persons  who 
had  received  no  other.*  This  of  course  precluded  acces- 
(sions,  except  on  the  condition  of  compliance  with  their 
proposal,  from  the  most  numerous  denomination  in  the 
state,  their  baptism  by  the  Congregational  ministers,  being 
considered  as  performed  by  laymen.  Although  the  clergy- 
men referred  to  were  singular  in  carrying  the  matter  so  far, 
yet  there  has  been  an  increasing  tendency  in  some  of  the 
clergy,  to  administer  Episcopal  baptism  to  such  as  desire 
it,  on  alleged  doubts  of  the  validity  of  former  baptism. 
Even  this  is  contrary  to  the  rubrics,  as  is  proved  by  many 
judicious  divines  of  the  Church  of  England.t  It  happened, 
that  a  distinguished  lay  member  of  the  convention — the 
Hon.  Rufus  King — had  brought  with  him  a  pamphlet  lately 
sent  to  him  from  England,  containing  a  judgment  recently 
given  in  an  ecclesiastical  court  of  that  country,  in  a  case 


•  One  of  the  two  clergymen  (Mr.  Barber)  distinguishing  themselves  as  above, 
a  few  years  after,  became  a  Roman  Catholic.  In  the  communion  thus  joined  by 
him,  it  is  not  uncommon  for  midwives  to  baptize.  It  is  a  well  known  property  of 
extremes,  that  they  are  often  seen  making  the  connecting  points  of  a  circle. 

t  Three  of  Mr.  Barber's  daughters  liecame  Ursulines,  and  a  fourth,  with  her 
mother,  entered  the  community  of  Visitation  Nuns  at  Georgetown,  D.  C.— See  "In 
Memoriam,  Sister  Sainte  Claire,"  1876,  p.  19.  Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS. 


precisely  to  the  point.  It  was  occasioned  by  a  suit  brought 
by  a  Dissenter  against  a  parish  minister  for  refusing  to  bury 
a  child  that  had  been  baptized  by  a  minister  dissenting 
from  the  establishment.  The  judge — Sirjphn  Nichols — 
decided  it  against  the  clergyman.  His  reasons,  grounded 
altogether  on  the  rubrics,  must  carry  conviction  to  every 
mind  so  far  as  concerns  the  question  of  the  sense  of  the 
Church  of  England.  It  is  true  that  this  does  not  settle  the 
question  of  the  sense  of  Scripture.  On  the  most  serious 
consideration  of  the  subject  many  years  ago,  conviction 
is  entertained,  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Church  arc 
not  at  variance  in  this  matter.  What  adds  to  the  sorrow 
felt,  at  the  introduction  of  a  new  ground  of  difference  in  the 
American  Church,  is  the  observing,  that  it  never  existed 
in  the  mother  Church,  until  about  the  year  1712;  and  that 
it  had  then  the  strongest  appearances  of  a~~poTitical  ma- 
noeuvre, played  off  against  the  fajriily  on  whom  the  succes- 
sion to  the  crown  had  been  settled  by  act  of  parliament.* 

If  the  prejudice  should  prevail,  it  is  very  unfortunate  —p 
that  two  of  our  bishops   (Dr.   Provoost  t  and  Dr.  Jarvis)"V  * 
never  received  baptism  from  an  Episcopalian  administrator./ 
So  that  who  knows  what  scruples  this  may  occasion,  as  to 
the  validity  of  many  of  our  ordinations,  and  among  the 
number,  those  of  the  very  two  gentlemen  who  made  the 
stir  at  the  late  convention  ?     It  is  true  that  to  meet  this 
difficulty,  the  distinction  is  devised,  of  the  possibility  of 
transmitting  the  Episcopal  succession  through  persons  who 
are  not  members  of  the  Christian  Church.     This  was  the 


I*]  11* 


*  James  the  First,  when  he  ascended  the  throne  of  England,  and  probably  his 
son  Charles  the  First,  who  succeeded  him,  had  been  baptized  in  Scotland  by  non- 
episcopalian  ministers.     And  at  the  restoration  of  Charles  the  Second,  when  the  <T 
great  mass  of  persons  who  had  grown  up  during  the  troubles,  had  been  non-epis- 
copally  baptized,  it  does  not  appear,  that  any  motion  was  made  to  rebaptize  them. 
This  confirms  the  sentiment,  that  when  the  doctrine  was  broached  in  the  reign  of  ) 
Queen  Anne,  it  was  in  hostility  to  the  Hanoverian  family. 

f  Bishop  Provoost  was  of  an  Episcopalian  family,  but  from  some  local  or  acci- 
dental cause,  was Tjaptized  by  a  minister  of  the  low  Dutch  Church.  Bishop  Jarvis 
had  been  born  and  educated  among  the  Congregationalists. 


252  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

sense  of  Mr.  Lawrence,  who  wrote  with  much  zeal  on  the 

subject,  about  the  time  above  referred  to.     But  Dr.  Hickes, 

who   corresponded  with   Mr.    Lawrence   relatively  to   the 

\  main  question,  and  harmonized  with  him  in  it,  disagreed 

/•  with   him   on  the  subordinate   point  of  a  man's   being   a 

1  bishop,  without  being  a  Christian.     Dr.  Hickes  is  high  in 

the  esteem  of  all  the  gentlemen  who  incline  to  the  opinion 

of  the  invalidity  of  lay  baptism.     Therefore,  who  can  tell 

to  what  extent  his  sentiment  may  prevail,  and  what  incon- 

veniences it  may  occasion  ?     There  would  be  no  certainty 

of  the  existence  of  a  bishop  in  Christendom. 

In  England,  the  scruple  arose  in  the  latter  end  of  the 
reign  of  Queen  Anne,  when  there  opened  the  prospect  of 
introducing  the  Pretender.  It  was  a  political  measure  to 
serve  that  cause,  and  fell  with  it.  A  reproach  was  thrown 
on  the  electoral  family,  that  they  were  unbaptized  Luther- 
/  ans:  as  is  noticed  in  Tindal's  continuation  of  Rapin  —  (p. 
725,  of  vol.  iii.  of  the  continuation  the  first.) 

In  confirmation  of  the  preceding  statement,  there  shall 

be  given  in  a  note  an  extract  from  a  charge  of  Archdeacon 

Sharp  to  the  clergy  of  his  archdeaconry.     His  book  is  a 

body  of  charges  delivered  by  him  on  the  rubrics  and  the 

canons.     He  gives  an  account  of  a  meeting  held  at  Lam- 

beth of  the  two  archbishops  and  all  the  bishops  who  were 

in  town.     The  year  in  which  their  conference  was  held  — 

1712  —  shows  the  coincidence  of  the  occasion  with  the  exist- 

f  ing  state  of  politics.     The  assembled  prelates  determined 

/  unanimously  in  contrariety  to  the  scruple  which  the  arti- 

,  fice  had  excited. 

As  Mr.  Lawrence's  well-known  book  on  lay  baptism  was 
issued  about  the  same  time,  it  was  probably  in  aid  of  the 
political  design.  For  Dr.  Sharp's  account  of  the  matter, 
see  the  note.* 

•  "In  that  year  (1712)  the  dispute  about  the  invalidity  of  lay  baptism  running 
pretty  high,  the  two  archbishops,  with  all  the  bishops  of  their  provinces  that  were 
in  town,  came  unanimously  to  this  resolution  —  that  lay  baptism  should  be  discour- 
aged as  much  as  possible  ;  but,  if  the  essentials  had  been  preserved  in  a  baptism 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  253 

There  being  notice  on  the  journals  of  the  rejection  of  a 
request  of  a  clergyman  in  Connecticut,  and  no  reason  given, 
it  comes  within  the  design  of  these  statements  to  record 
the  case. 

The  book  is  well  esteemed;  and  it  was  not  from  dissatis- 
faction with  it,  that  the  application  was  rejected,  but  be- 
cause the  request  to  enjoin  the  use  of  the  chants  and  tunes 
exclusively  of  all  others,  was  thought  unreasonable.  The 
expectation  of  the  applicant  has  been  misunderstood  by 
some,  who  have  supposed,  that  he  included  in  his  demand 
the  prohibition  of  the  singing  of  psalms  in  metre.  It  is 
true,  that  he  disapproves  of  such  singing,  from  the  opinion 
that  it  has  an  alliance  with  schism.  But  he  meant  no  fur- 
ther, than  as  regarded  chanting  and  the  singing  of  anthems.  ' 
Yet  to  have  gratified  him,  would  have  been  a  high  exer- 
cise of  power.  To  set  ecclesiastical  authority  at  work  on  a 
subject,  which  heretofore,  in  the  Church  of  England  and  in 
this  Church,  and  probably  in  every  other,  has  been  left  at 
large,  would  not  forward,  but  hinder  the  carrying  of  more 
important  discipline  into  effect. 

by  a  lay  hand,  it  was  n-.-f  ti>  /v  repealed.     I>ut  then,  when  it  was  proposed  that  a 
declaration  of  their  sentiments  to  this  purpose  should  be  published,  in  order  to 
silence  or  determine  the  debates  raised  on  this  question,  it  was  resolved  upon 
mature  deliberation,  to  leave  the  question  as  much  undecided  by  any  public  dec- 
laration, as  it  was  left  in  the  public  offices  ancTcanons  of  the  Church,  for  the  better  / 
security  of  discipline,  and  to  prevent  any  advantages  that  might  be  taken  by  Dissent- 1 
ers,  or  seem  to  be  given  them,  in  favor  of  their  baptisms;  though  they  do  not  prop-  ) 
erly  come  within  the  question  of  lay  baptisms  in  cases  of  extremity." 

Dr.  Sharp  professes  to  have  taken  the  above  from  the  original  papers  signed  by 
the  two  archbishops.  • 

The  matter  above  referred  to,  as  intended  to  be  left  undefined,  was  not  the  re- 
baptizing  by  the  form  at  large,  or  by  the  hypothetical  form,  for  against  both  of 
these  measures,  the  archdeacon  cautions  his  clergy.  But,  as  in  the  English  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  in  the  introductory  instrument  entitled,  "Concerning  the  Ser- 
vice of  the  Church,"  a  minister  under  doubt  is  directed  to  have  recourse  to  the 
ordinary,  and  as  a  doubt  may  occur  concerning  the  words  to  be  made  use  of  in  the 
admission  of  a  child  privately  baptized — "  I  certify  that  all  is  well  done,  etc.,"  not 
because  of  the  insufficiency  of  the  administrator,  but  on  account  of  the  irregu- 
larity of  the  act,  the  minister  is  counselled  by  Dr.  Sharp  to  avail  himself  of  the  said 
proviso,  attached  to  the  preface  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 


i 


254  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

This  is  not  said,  without  the  being  aware  of  the  great 
abuse  abounding  in  the  department  of  psalmody,  partly  by 
leaving  the  portions  to  be  sung  to  the  choice  of  clerks  des- 
titute of  judgment,  and  partly  by  singing  tunes  either  un- 
suitable to  divine  worship,  or  suitable  to  some  of  the  sacred 
compositions,  yet  not  to  those  with  which  they  are  unskil- 
fully connected.  It  was  designed  to  guard  against  both  of 
these  evils,  by  the  rubric  prefixed  to  the  Book  of  Psalms  in 
metre.  That  provision,  if  applied,  is  a  sufficient  remedy 
for  both.  If  any  thing  further  should  be  attempted,  in  a 
field  open  to  so  great  a  diversity  of  taste,  it  is  probable 
that  no  convention  would  assemble  without  projected  im- 
provements prepared  to  be  laid  before  them.  The  fault  of 
the  unnecessary  extension  of  authority  would  be  felt  in 
changes  without  end. 

In  consequence  of  a  canon  passed  at  the  convention  of 
1804,  there  was  drawn  up  by  the  House  of  Bishops,  and 
sent  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  a  Pastoral 
Letter,  addressed  to  the  members  generally  of  this  Church. 
It  had  been  understood,  that  this  was  a  transaction,  over 
which  the  latter  house  were  to  have  no  control. 

Philadelphia  was  fixed  on  as  the  next  place  of  meeting: 
and,  as  in  the  last  convention,  the  business  was  concluded 
with  prayer  by  the  presiding  bishop,  in  presence  of  both 
houses. 

POSTSCRIPT. 

The  consecration,\yhich  took  place  in  Trinity  Church,  in 
the  City  of  New  York,  May  29,  1811,  soon  after  the  rising 
of  the  convention,  may  be  considered  as  in  some  sort  the 
unfinished  business  of  it.  Accordingly,  any  important  cir- 
cumstance attending  said  act,  may  properly  have  a  place  in 
these  statements. 

Such  a  circumstance  occurred  during  the  service,  and 
was  the  consequence  of  the  inadvertence  of  the  author, 
who,  in  the  imposition  of  hands  on  each  of  the  two  bishops- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  255 

, 

elect,  omitted  the  words — "  In  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  '» 
.  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."     The  officiating  bishop  ^ 
'  was  unconscious  of  the  omission,  and  the  first  intimation  "/ 
'  of  it  to  him  was  by  Bishop  Jarvis  in  the  way  from  church. 

Although  the  author  regretted  what  had  happened,  yet 
he  had  no  expectation  that  any  conclusion  would  be  drawn 
from  it  for  the  impeaching  of  the  validity  of  the  act.  Nei- 
ther would  this  have  happened,  if  it  had  not  fallen  in  with 
the  passions  which  had  been  excited  by  the  late^  election  in 
New  York. 

Not  long  after  the  consecration,  it  was  published  to  the 
world,  that  the  supposed  act  of  consecration  was  essen- 
tially defective,  because  of  the  want  of  those  solemn 
words.  Lamentations  were  made  concerning  the  conse- 
quences which  may  ensue  to  affect  the  Episcopal  suc- 
cession through  future  ages,  altogether  owing  to  its  in- 
validating of  Bishop  Hobart's  Episcopal  character,  for  not 
a  word  was  said  in  trie  publications,  of  its  having  of  the 
same  effect  on  Bishop  Griswold's,  although  all  the  gentle- 
men who  had  noticed  the  omission  testified  that  it  applied 
to  both  the  cases. 

The  clamor  thus  raised  was  of  course  met  with  the  de- 
nial, that  any  precise  form  of  words  was  essential  to  such 
an  occasion.     But  this  not  producing  silence,  inquiry  was 
made  into  the  history  of  the  form,  as  it  stands  in  the  Ordi- 
nal; when  it  appeared,  that  the  words  in  question  were  no  ^ 
part  of  the  form  of  the  Church  of  England,  until  the  reign  y/)  I)  2> 
of  Charles  II.;  were  never  in  that  of  the  primitive  Church;  / 
and  are  not  in  the  Roman  Pontifical  at  this  day.     So  that, 
on  the  principle  of  the  opposite  argument,  there  is  not  at 
this  time  a  Christian  bishop  in  the  world.* 

Then  the  objection  took  a  new  turn,  and  was  rested  on 
the  preface  to  the  Ordinal,  which  requires  the  consecra- 
tion to  be  conducted  agreeably  to  the  form  in  that  book. 


*  See  Bishop  Sparrow's  collection,  and  De  Courayer's  "Defence  of  the  English 
Ordinations." 


256  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

According  to  this,  the  accidental  omission  of  a  word  or  two, 
contained  in  the  book,  must  invalidate  any  consecration  or 
ordination  in  which  it  may  happen.  The  absurdity  being 
stated  as  a  consequence,  the  answer  was,  that  in  this  in- 
stance, the  omitted  words  involve  an  important  doctrine  of 
our  holy  religion.  It  was  replied,  that  the  doctrine  appears 
in  many  places  in  the  service,  and  that  it  is  manifestly  in- 
consistent to  yield,  that  the  mention  of  the  Trinity  dur- 
ing the  imposition  of  hands,  is  not  essential  on  the  mere 
ground  of  the  importance  of  the  doctrine;  to  yield  further, 
that  necessity  is  not  created  by  positive  institution  only, 
and  yet  to  contend  that  these  united  render  the  words 
indispensable. 

The  disposition  manifested  soon  spent  itself,  owing,  as 
is  conceived,  to  the  circumstance,  that  a  few  gentlemen  of 
talents,  who  had  interested  themselves  on  the  occasion, 
without  having  been  in  the  habit  of  attending  to  the  con- 
cerns of  the  Church,  would  not  commit  their  characters  by 
joining  in  a  criticism  so  indefensible. 


R.     Page  41.     Of  the  Convention  in  1814. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  the 

Rev.  Dr.  Croes  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

j  The  Secretaries  of  the  two  houses,  were,  of  the  former,  the 

'i4  I     Rev._Jackson  Kemper,  and  of  the  latter,  the  Rev.  Ashbel 

Baldwin,  assisted  by  James  Milnor,  Esq. 

wy'l'l'    The  opening  sermon  was  by   Bishop  Hobart,  of  New 
;<•  *York. 

The  object  at  present,  as  in  relation  to  transactions  of 
former  conventions,  is  principally  to  bring  into  view  some 
facts  which  might  otherwise  be  forgotten,  after  having  had 
an  influence  in  the  determination  of  the  measures  adopted. 
The  Ninth  Canon,  which  dispenses  with  certain  literary 
qualifications  in  some  cases,  had  been  misunderstood,  and 
abused  to  the  sustaining  of  the  notion,  that  the  qualifica- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  257 

tion  serving  for  a  substitute,  is  mere  fluency  of  speech,  evi-(" 
dently  found  in  some  very  ignorant  men,  and  even  in  some/ 
whose  understandings  are  naturally  weak.     It  was  thought,  ' 
that  a  solemn  declaration,  guarding  against  the  error,  might 
be  of  use. 

The  alteration  of  the  Twenty-ninth  Canon,  was  occa- 
sioned by  a  difference  found  in  the  diocesan  constitutions, 
and  by  a  wish  not  to  interfere  therewith,  but  to  leave  them 
to  their  respective  operation.  In  some  states,  no  minister, 
not  provided  with  a  parish,  and  no  deacon,  has  a  seat  or 
vote  in  the  convention.  In  others,  a  contrary  provision 
had  been  made.  What  brought  the  subject  into  view  at 
this  time,  was  a  change  which  had  taken  place  in  Connect- 
icut; the  old  law,  of  excluding  non-parochial  ministers  and 
deacons,  having  given  way  to  the  contrary  regulation,  much 
to  the  dissatisfaction  of  some  of  the  clergy.  The  difference 
did  not  come  under  question  in  the  General  Convention. 
But  it  seemed  reasonable  in  this  body,  while  they  avoided 
including  the  two  descriptions  of  persons  alluded  to,  in  the 
provision  for  the  Office  of  Institution,  not  to  interfere  with 
the  economy  of  those  dioceses  wherein  they  were  admitted. 
The  opinion  is  here  avowed,  that  the  latter  course  is  the 
most  proper,  although  not  alleged  to  be  necessary.  Other- 
wise the  Church  may  be  deprived  of  the  counsel  of  some 
of  the  ablest  of  her  ministers,  who  are  prevented  from  the 
acceptance  of  parishes  by  allowable  causes;  for  example, 
the  filling  of  professorships  in  literary  institutions.  Besides, 
there  may  be  aged  clergymen,  unfit  for  active  service,  and 
yet,  not  the  less  competent  to  the  giving  of  advice.  It  is  a 
very  great  injury  to  religion,  what  has  occasionally  hap- 
pened, and  will  be  especially  apt  to  occur  in  every  large 
city,  that  a  man  in  holy  Orders  may  find  it  an  eligible  place 
of  residence  for  enjoyment  or  for  the  management  of  some 
secular  business.  His  life  may  be  a  scandal  to  the  Church; 
and  yet  it  would  be  thought  unreasonable  to  subject  him 
to  religious  discipline,  under  a  constitution  not  acknowledg- 
ing him  as  having  an  interest  in  it. 


258  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    ClfUKCIf. 

What  was  done  in  relation  to  the  Fortieth  Canon  was  at 
the  instance  of  the  clerical  members  from  Connecticut. 
The  canon  provides,  that  every  clergyman  shall  keep  a  list 
of  his  adult  parishioners.  In  the  said  state,  considerable 
difficulty  was  alleged  to  have  arisen,  as  to  what  may  be 
called  a  joint  act,  in  the  case  of  a  person  baptized  in  some 
other  communion,  but  joining  his  or  herself  to  this  Church. 
In  the  case  supposed,  the  joint  act  must  have  been  of  the 
person  and  of  the  minister  recording  his  name.  Under 
existing  circumstances,  it  does  not  appear  how  the  query 
could  have  been  splved,  except  in  the  way  suggested  by  the 
bishops;  that  is,  by  bringing  the  matter  to  the  test  of 
whatever  was  considered  by  both  of  the  parties,  as  tending 
to  the  effect  contemplated.  It  must  be  confessed,  however, 
that  this  manifests  an  imperfect  state  of  discipline.  The 
subject  is  worthy  of  the  provision  of  a  religious  form,  with 
the  view  of  establishing  the  certainty  of  the  transaction. 
But  to  make  such  a  provision  consistent,  none  besides  per- 
sons of  fair  characters  should  be  admitted  within  the  pale, 
others  to  be  allowed  as  hearers,  and  even  to  occupy  sittings 
within  a  church,  but  not  to  have  votes  in  its  concerns. 

There  was  nothing  further  done  in  relation  to  the  can- 
ons, except  the  making  of  a  slight  alteration  in  the  Forty- 
fifth;  designed  to  dispense  with  the  duty  of  reading,  in  the 
General  Convention,  the  reports  of  the  conventions^  in  the 
different  states. 

Perhaps  some  reason  may  be  required  for  the  delay  still 
occurring  in  regard  to  the  review  of  the  Homilies,  recog- 
nized as  they  are  in  the  Articles.  There  had  been  some 
correspondence  on  the  subject  between  two  of  the  bishops, 
the  author  and  Bishop  Hobart.  But  it  is  involved  in  more 
difficulty  than  would  easily  be  supposed  by  any  person 
who  has  not  attended  to  it  particularly.  That,  besides 
verbal  alterations,  some  others  arc  called  for,  is  universally 
agreed.  But  to  make  the  latter,  without  departing  from 
the  principle  of  avoiding  the  charge,  and  even  of  giving 
plausible  ground  to  any  to  pretend,  that  we  have  deviated, 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  259 

in  respect  to  doctrine,  is  scarcely  to  be  expected.  On  this 
account  the  author  is  not  sure  that  it  will  not  be  best  to 
leave  the  two  books  as  they  now  stand,  being  referred  to 
in  the  Articles,  as  a  larger  explication  of  Christian  doctrine; 
without  its  being  understood  that  assent  to  the  article  im- 
plies approbation  of  every  sentiment  in  the  Homilies,  or 
of  every  series  of  reasoning  whereby  any  doctrine  of  them 
is  sustained.  At  the  same  time,  if  any  minister  incline  to 
read  a  homily  from  his-  pulpit  or  from  his  desk,  and  will 
take  the  trouble  of  clearing  it  from  its  obsolete  terms  and 
local  references  (if  there  be  any),  there  is  nothing  to  hinder 
his  doing  so.  In  another  point  of  view,  however,  it  ap- 
peared of  the  utmost  consequence  to  take  some  measure  in 
regard  to  those  very  instructive  compositions.  Their  being 
sanctioned  by  the  Thirty-fifth  Article,  which  is  assented  to 
by  all  persons  admitted  to  the  ministry,  renders  it  abso- 
lutely necessary  that  they  should  have  the  means  of  pe- 
rusing them,  and  even  of  well  weighing  their  contents. 
This  is  not  always  easily  to  be  accomplished.  Accordingly, 
it  was  judged  expedient  to  encourage  a  publication  of  them; 
with  a  caution  against  its  being  understood,  that  this 
Church  is  concerned  in  what  relates  to  the  civil  policy  of 
Great  Britain.  Under  these  views  of  the  subject,  they  have 
since  been  printed. 

For  the  sense  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  delivered  by  them 
on  this  subject,  see  Appendix,  No.  27. 

The  measure  which  appears  on  the  minutes,  designed  to 
introduce  the  posture  of  standing  during  the  act  of  singing 
portions  of  the  psalms  and  of  the  hymns  in  metre,  requires 
to  be  accounted  for.  It  professes  to  have  been  adopted  for 
the  avoiding  of  diversity  of  custom.  But  there  may  be  an 
interesting  question  as  to  the  cause  of  that  diversity. 

It  is  evident  that  psalms  in  metre  are  not  known  in  the 
rubrics  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  yet  it  was  provided 
in  the  very  beginning  of  the  reformation,  by  the  act  of  uni- 
formity_then  passed,  that  psalms  or  prayers,  taken  out  of 
the  Bible,  might  be  used  in  divine  service,  provided  it  were 


260  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

not  done  to  the  omitting  of  any  part  thereof.     This  was  in 

the  reign  of  Edward   VI.     In   the   course   of  that    reign, 

Sternhold  and  Hopkins  edited  their  version,  which  must 

have  been  brought  into  use,  not  by  any  special  act  of  au- 

thority, but  under  the  sanction  of  that  provision.     These 

facts  have  been  stated,  in  a  preceding  part  of  the  present 

work.*     They  are  again  referred  to,  in  order  to  make  them 

aground  of  the  supposition,  that  the  posture  of  sitting  grew 

out  of  the  laxity  of  manner,  in  which  this_part  j>f  the  pub- 

lic devotion  was  introduced.     When  the  present  writer  was 

inEngland,  during  the  whole  of  the  year  1771,  and  nearly 

i  the  half  of  1772,  he  was  not  in  any  church  wherein  the 

\  people  stood  at  the  singmg  of  the  metre  psalms.     He  does 

not  remember  to  have  seen  it,  during  his  short  visit  to  that 

\A^\        country,  about  fifteen  years  afterwards.     And  yet  it  seems 

/  well  attested  of  late,  that  the  posture  of  standing  prevails 


Jfijji') 
ff* 


in  London  and  its  vicinity,  and  elsewhere.     It  is  said   to 
have  been  introduced  by  the  late  excellent  Bishop  of  Lon- 
don— Dr.   Porteus,  and   this    is  very  probable.     The   cus- 
.  t>U^v  torn  had  travelled  to  some  congregations  in  this  country, 
wherein,  until  lately,  it  is  not  probable  that  there  was  a 
/  single  congregation  that  stood  during  this  part  of  the  ser- 
)  vice.     In  order  to  put  an  end  to  the  diversity,  and  under 
the  conviction   that  standing  is  the  more  fit  and  decent 
posture,  the  bishops   proposed,   and  the  other  house  ap- 
proved of  the  measure  which  has  been  adopted.     For  this 
document,  see  Appendix,  No.  28. 

It  appears  on  the  journal,  that  on  a  proposal  of  a  pres- 
byter of  this  Church,  to  add  to  the  anthems  serving  on 
certain  festivals,  instead  of  the  "  Venite,"  certain  forms 
from  the  psalms,  etc.,  prepared  by  himself  with  musical 
accompaniments,  the  House  of  Bishops  proposed,  and  were 
concurred  with  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies, 
a  determination  not  to  enter  on  a  review  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  during  the  present  session;  which  may 

•  See  ante,  p.  241.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  261 

seem  too  general  for  the  occasion.  Certainly  the  two 
houses,  had  it  so  pleased  them,  might  have  proposed  to  the 
next  convention  a  particular  change,  without  going  a  step 
farther.  But  had  it  been  moved  by  any  member,  and  made 
a  subject  of  discussion,  any  other  member  might  have  done 
the  same,  so  that  a  general  review  might  have  been  the 
consequence.  As  for  the  anthems,  they  were  such  as 
might  have  been  expected  from  the  musical  sufficiency  of 
the  proposer.  There  was  another  matter  of  a  different 
nature,  comprehended  under  the  determination  of  the  two 
houses.  A  reverend  member  of  the  convention  had  brought 
to  it  a  manuscript  work  of  his  own,  on  an  important  subject 
of  religion,  which  he  wished  to  be  sanctioned  by  the  body. 
It  is  not  easy  to  calculate  the  time  they  might  have  been 
kept  together,  for  a  due  examination  of  a  work  of  this  sort, 
nor  how  many  similar  applications  in  future  would  have 
grown  out  of  compliance  in  the  present  instance.  The 
reasons  of  the  conventional  measures  in  the  above  cases, 
are  recorded  with  the  hope,  that  they  will  have  weight  on 
the  like  occasions,  if  they  should  occur.  For  the  determi- 
nation, see  the  Appendix,  No.  29. 

The  reference  to- the  bishops,  and  to  other  ecclesiastical 
authorities,  for  the  obtaining  of  information  on  the  subject 
of  a  theological  school,  originated  thus.  The  convention 
in  South  Carolina,  had  instructed  their  deputies  to  propose 
the  establishing  of  such  an  institution,  and,  accordingly,  it 
had  been  moved  and  discussed  in  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies,  and  by  them  negatived.  On  the  last 
day  of  the  session,  it  was  moved  in  the  House  of  Bishops, 
by  the  bishop  of  the  Church  in  that  state.  The  question 
was  argued  with  much  interest,  although  with  the  utmost 
moderation,  by  that  bishop  on  one  side,  and  by  the  assist- 
ant bishop  of  the  Church  in  the  diocese  of  New  York,  on 
the  other.  The  design  interfered  especially  with  the  views 
of  the  latter,  who  had  adopted  measures,  and  issued  pro- 
posals, for  the  instituting  of  a  seminary  under  the  imme- 
diate superintendence  of  himself  and  his  successors.  It 


262  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

was  to  have  been  seated  in  New  Jersey,  and  the  bishop  of 
that  state  was  to  have  been  joined  in  the  superintendence. 
The  present  author,  conscious  that  he  had  not  given  much 
attention  to  the  subject  in  this  comparative  view  of  it,  and 
perceiving  that  existing  circumstances  would  prevent  a 
determination  during  the  present  session,  avoided  the  open- 
ing of  his  mind  as  to  the  merits  of  the  question. 

The  proposal  respecting  a  copyright  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  had  been  suggested  as  a  mean  of  obtain- 
ing a  handsome  fund  for  beneficial  purposes.  Besides  the 
difficulties  in  the  way,  suggested  in  the  instrument  relative 
to  the  obtaining  of  information  on  the  subject,  there  is  the 
insuperable  objection  which  it  seemed  the  most  prudent 
not  to  notice,  that  although  the  Church  does  not  now 
contemplate  alterations  in  her  Liturgy,  yet  she  ought  not 
to  commit  herself  in  a  measure,  which  would  put  it  be- 
yond her  power  for  a  considerable  course  of  years.  To 
have  given  this  as  a  reason,  might  have  been  misunderstood 
by  the  public.  Independently  on  that  circumstance,  there 
were  those  who  had  been  formerly  witnesses  of  jealousy  ex- 
cited by  this  cause,  which  they  wished  never  to  see  renewed, 
so  long  as  there  are  other  ways  of  guarding  the  integrity 
of  the  book  against  corrupt  copies.  In  most,  and  probably 
all,  of  the  present,  there  are  some  errata,  which,  in  general, 
may  be  detected  by  the  reader,  and  which  might  be  more 
effectually  guarded  against  by  an  authoritative  table. 

The  declaration  of  the  bishops,  approved  of  by  the  other 
house,  relative  to  the  identity  of  this  Church  with  the  body 
formerly  known  by  the  name  of  "  the  Church  of  England  in 
America,"  arose  from  the  circumstance,  that  in  some  cause 
or  causes  pending  in  the  courts,  this  identity  had  been 
denied. 

The  bishops  were  informed  by  one  of  their  body,  that, 
not  long  ago,  the  sentiment  had  been  expressed  to  him  by 
a  gentleman  high  in  office,  who  grounded  what  he  alleged 
on  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  edited  in  1785.  The  title 
of  this  book  declares  it  to  be  a  proposal.  It  was  never  rat- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  263 

ified,  as  will  appear  on  a  reference  to  the  journals.  Had  a 
subsequent  convention  ratified  it,  the  inference  would  have 
been  untenable  in  regard  to  a  Church,  the  principles  of 
which,  as  of  the  Church  from  which  it  became  separated 
by  a  dispensation  of  Providence,  declares  its  competency  to 
every  act  of  self  government.  The  identity  of  the  body 
remained,  although  accompanied  by  a  newly  acquired  in- 
dependence. Still  the  plea,  on  the  ground  taken  from  it,  is 
invalidated  by  the  non-acceptance  of  the  book.  It  being 
foreseen,  that  this  pretence  will  be  set  up,  whenever  the 
appeal  shall  come  on  in  Washington,  there  was  supposed 
to  be  a  call  for  the  declaratory  instrument,  which  has  occa- 
sioned the  present  explanation. 

There  was  a  consideration  which  rendered  the  declar- 
ation especially  expedient,  but  not  proper  to  be  noticed  on 
the  journal.  The  opposite  principle  was  the  known  opinion 
of  some  leading  characters  of  Virginia,  who,  on  that  ground, 
had  defended  the  act  of  the  legislature  of  thatTstate,  whidi 
deprived  our  communion  of  its  churches  and  its  glebes. 

Although  the  question  here  referred  to  was  brought  be- 
fore the  convention  incidentally,  yet,  as  it  may  hereafter  be 
a  subject  of  more  considerable  attention,  and  big  with  im- 
portant consequences,  occasion  shall  be  taken  to  state  the 
reasons  for  supporting  the  position,  that  what  is  now  called 
"the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America," 
is  precisely,  in  succession,  the  body  formerly  known  by  the 
name  of  "the  Church  of  England  in  America;"  the  changes 
of  name  having  been  the  dictate  of  a  change  of  circum- 
stances, in  the  civil  constitution  of  the  country.* 

1st.  From  the  beginning  of  the  organizing  of  this  Church, 
the  principle  has  prevailed.  It  impelled  the  applying  to 


*  Since  the  penning  of  these  remarks,  the  author  has  seen,  in  print,  a  serious  en- 
deavor to  date  the  origin  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  from  the  period  of  the  conse- 
cration of  her  bishops.  The  position  is  rested  on  grounds  which  do  not  here  seem 
to  call  for  a  professed  refutation :  but  it  may  be  remarked,  that  the  sentiments 
expressed  by  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  advocated  in  this  place,  apply  to  the 
notion  now  referred  to,  as  well  as  to  that  of  which  they  were  professedly  intended. 


264  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

England  for  consecration,  in  preference  to  another  country, 
where  it  might  have  been  easily  had,  without  the  making 
of  requests,  not  to  be  complied  with  but  by  the  interference 
of  the  legislature  of  a  foreign  country,  which  the  venerable 
persons  petitioned,  might  not  be  able  to  obtain. 

2dly.  It  will  very  much  tend  to  check  the  spirit  of  inno- 
vation, on  any  essential  point  of  doctrine,  because  if  such 
a  matter  should  be  attempted,  the  original  standard  will  be 
appealed  to,  and  the  adherents  to  it  will  plead,  that  they 
are  the  Church  from  which  the  innovators,  whether  many 
or  few,  have  departed.  This  needs  not  to  hinder  altera- 
tions in  less  important  matters,  because,  notwithstanding 
the  parentage  gloried  in  by  us,  we  are  an  independent 
Church,  and  so  acknowledged  by  that  from  which  we  plead 
to  have  descended. 

3dly.  The  security  of  property  is  a  consideration.  This 
has  been  spoken  of  already;  but  there  shall  be  added  infor- 
mation received  from  a  respectable  source.  It  is,  that  on 
the  arrival  of  Bishop  Seabury  in  Connecticut,  he  consulted 
his  friend,  Dr.  William  Samuel  Johnson,  of  Stratford,  whose 
leaning  to  him  and  his  cause,  with  a  strong  attachment  to 
the  Episcopal  Church,  can  not  be  doubted,  as  to  his  right 
to  the  income  of  a  handsome  landed  property,  left  for  the 
support  of  a  future  bishop  of  the  Church  of  England  in 
America.  Dr.  Johnson  is  said  to  have  been  of  opinion,  that 
Bishop  Seabury  could  not  claim  it. 

4thly,  and  principally;  regard  is  here  had  to  there  being 
a  fence  to  the  truths  of  the  Gospel,  prevalent  in  the  days 
of  Edward  VI.  Any  superadditions,  which  may  have  been 
either  popular,  or  introduced  by  influential  churchmen 
afterwards,  are  here  put  out  of  view. 

The  principle  contended  for  can  not  be  understood,  with- 
out remarking  the  distinction  between  a  sameness  of  two 
j  Churches  in  doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship,  and  their 
|  identity  in  a  corporate  capacity.  When"  in  the  reign  of 
James  I.,  and  afterward  in  that  of  Charles  II.,  there  were 
consecrated  in  England  bishops  for  the  Church  of  Scotland, 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  265 

the  Churches  of  the  two  countries  were  the  same  in  the 
particulars  of  principle  above  mentioned;  but  were  so  far 
from  being  one,  that  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  it,  and  to 
guard  against  a  consequent  ascendency  of  the  English  hier- 
archy over  that  of  Scotland,  it  was  carefully  provided,  at 
each  of  the  times  referred  to,  that  the  bishops  of  the  latter 
country  should  not  be  consecrated  by  either  of  the  Arch- 
bishops of  Canterbury  and  York. 

Neither  is  what  is  here  said  intended  to  discountenance 
all  changes,  which  succeeding  circumstances  may  render 
expedient.  In  respect  to  doctrine,  if,  at  any  time,  for  the 
sake  of  comprehension,  there  should  be  silence  on  any 
points  not  essential  to  Christian  verity,  it  would  not  super- 
sede the  principle  here  sustained.  On  the  subject  of  rites 
and  ceremonies  it  is  the  judgment  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, that  they  may  be  regulated  according  to  the  circum- 
stances of  different  times  and  places.  And  under  the  head 
of  the  constitution  of  the  Christian  Church  and  the  disci- 
pline of  it,  there  is  no  reluctance  to  record  the  opinion,  that 
if  an  important  object  were  likely  to  be  accomplished,  there 
would  be  no  difficulty  in  taking  a  ground,  which  would  not 
be  objected  to  by  the  more  moderate  of  the  non-episco- 
palians, provided  there  ceased  objections  of  another  kind, 
especially  the  greatest  hindrance  of  all,  in  the  irritation 
kept  alive  by  the  intemperate  zeal  of  some  o,n  each  side. 
But,  if  ever  there  should  be  a  surrender  of  those  evangelical 
truths,  which  are  not  only  affirmed  in  the  Thirty-nine  Arti- 
cles, but  pervade  the  services,  and  are  generally  understood 
to  be  the  leading  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  its  fall  may 
be  counted  on,  and  because  of  such  change,  ought  not  to  be 
regretted. 

The  maintaining  of  the  above  principle,  consistently  with 
a  strong  desire  of  comprehending  Bishop  Seabury  and  his 
Church  within  our  connection,  placed  the  author  of  this  in 
very  delicate  circumstances  for  some  time;  especially  as 
he  was  not  so  happy  as  to  have  the  concurrence  of  Bish- 
op Provoost  on  the  latter  subject.  The  author  persevered 


266  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

with  him,  in  the  plan  of  obtaining  the  canonical  number 
from  England;  but  thought  there  would  be  no  inconsistency,  ( 
after  the  succession  had  become  complete,  and  even  during  / 
the  measures  leading  to  it,  in  yielding  personal  priority  to  r 
Bishop  Seabury. 

Accordingly,  the  author  will  conclude  with  the  expres- 
sion of  a  feeling,  which  from  his  very  early  years,  has  been 
attendant  on  his  views  of  religion;  and  which  he  can  not 
clothe  in  more  appropriate  words  than  those  of  Father  Paul, 
of  Venice — "  Esto  perpetua  "  :  that  is,  may  the  Church  so 
constituted  and  continued,  last  forever. 

Because  of  the  importance  of  the  declaration  of  the  con- 
vention on  the  preceding  subject,  it  is  given  in  the  Ap- 
pendix, No.  30. 


S.     Page  46.     Of  the  Convention  of  1817. 

Bishop  White  presided  in  the  House  of  Bishops.  In  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  first  Dr.  Isaac  Wil- 
kins,  of  New  York,  and  afterward  the  Rev.  William  H. 
Wilmer,  of  Alexandria,  presided.  The  Secretanes~weFe, 
of  theTorrnerTiouse,  the  Rev.  Benjamin  T.  Onderdonk, 
and  of  the  latter,  the  Rev.  Ashbel  Baldwin.* 

After  divine  service,  and  the  sermon  by  Bishop  Gris- 
wold,  and  in  compliance  with  a  resolve  of  the  last_.coif 
vention,  there  was  an  administration  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion. 

There  having  appeared  at  this  convention  two  bishops, 
in  addition  to  those  formerly  mentioned,  it  falls  within  the 
design  of  this  work  to  record,  that  the  first  of  them,  the 
Rev.  Dr.  James  Kemp,  of  Maryland,  was  consecrated  on 
I  the  first  of  September,  1814,  in  Christ  Church,  in  the  City 
yA  of  New  Brunswick,  New  Jersey,  by  the  presiding  bishop, 
Assisted  by  Bishops  Hobart  and  Moore;  and  that  the  other, 


j>f- 

\/y 


The  assistant  was  the  Rev.  Mr.  Rudd,  who  usually  did  the  work.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  267 

the  Rev.  Dr.  John  Croes,  of  New  Jersey,  was  consecrated  on 
the  I  Qth  day  of  November;  1815,  in  St.  Peter's  Church,  in 
the  City  of  Philadelphia,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  assisted 
by  Bishops  Hobart  and  Kemp. 

Opposition  having  been  made  to  the  consecration   of 
Bishop  Kemp,  the  three  consecrating  bishops  weighed  very 
seriously  the  objections  presented  to  their  notice;  the  more 
so,  as  among  the  signers  of  the  protest  sent,  there  appeared 
the  names  of  persons  known  to  have  possessed  respectability 
in  the  diocese.     The  detailing  of  the  objections  included  in 
the  protest,  with  the  reasons  of  their  adjudged  irrelevancy, 
seems  called  for  by  regard  to  the  future  respectability  of  \ 
the  Church,    and  to  the  consistency  of  the  consecrating  ] 
bishops. 

The  first  objection  was,  that  the  office  of  ji__suffragan  X  $  -  // 
bishop  was  unknown  in  the  constitution  of  the  Church 
Maryland.  On  this  point  it  was  considered,  that  although 
neither  the  office  of  a  suffragan  nor  that  of  a  coadjutor  or 
assistant  bishop,  was  noticed  in  the  constitution,  either  of 
them  might  be  rendered  expedient  by  existing  circum- 
stances, as  a  character  often  met  with  in  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church;  that  a  coadjutor  or  assistant  bishop  had 
been  introduced  into  another  diocese,  without  being  men- 
tioned in  its  constitution,  and  yet  without  the  charge  of 
unconstitutionality;  that  as  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  now 
in  question,  in  the  year  1811,  had  proposed  the  electing  of 
a  bishop  to  aid  him,  he  must  have  presumed  the  legality  of 
the  measure,  and  it  has  not  since  appeared  that  he  al- 
tered his  mind,  or  that  the  sentiment  had  been  until  now 
contradicted  by  any  person;  that  in  1812,  the  convention 
had  balloted  on  the  question  of  having  a  suffragan,  and 
although  it  was  then  carried  in  the  negative,  it  does  not 
appear  that  they  were  supposed  by  any  of  the  members  to 
be  irregularly  occupied.  Even  the  signers  of  the  protest 
must  have  thought  it  regular  at  the  time. 

The  second  objection  denied  that  Dr.  Kemp  had  been       /      fl 

chosen  by  a  constitutional  majority:  but  the  journal  mani-  '" 

' 


268  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Tested  the  contrary;  there  appearing  to  have  been  in  his 
favor  two  thirds  of  the  members  present.  This  objection 
was  stated  in  such  general  terms,  that  it  could  not  have 
been  much  relied  on. 

The  third  objection  imported,  that  the  general  opinion 
concerning  the  measure  of  choosing  a  suffragan,  had  been 
expressed  by  the  silence  of  the  convention  of  1813;  the 
next  after  that  which  had  negatived  the  measure.  There 
may  have  been  some  reason  for  this,  which  the  consecrat- 
ing bishops  had  no  means  of  obtaining.  The  prospect  of 
the  returning  health  of  the  diocesan  bishop,  may  have  been 
the  reason.  The  bishops  however  perceived,  from  inspec- 
tion of  the  journal,  that  of  nineteen  clergymen  and  thirty- 
two  laymen  present  in  the  convention  of  1813,  not  a  third 
of  either  order  had  been  induced  to  sign  the  protest.  Al- 
though there  were  in  this  convention  two  more  of  the 
clergy,  and  seven  more  of  the  laity  than  in  that  of  1814, 
when  the  choice  was  made;  yet  the  members  of  the  latter 
were  precisely  those  of  1812;  when  no  fault  appears  to  have 
been  alleged  against  the  balloting  for  a  suffragan,  because 
of  the  paucity  of  electors.  It  was  further  considered  under 
this  head,  that  the  requisition  of  two  thirds  for  the  electing 
of  a  bishop,  as  provided  by  the  constitution  of  the  Church 
of  Maryland,  and  which  was  satisfied  by  the  issue  of  the 
election  in  the  present  instance,  was  probably  for  the  pur- 
pose of  guarding  against  an  advantage  which  might  be 
taken  of  a  thin  convention.  On  any  other  principle,  it  \ 
would  seem  to  have  been  unwise  to  make  a  provision,  by  f 
which  a  sixth  of  the  number  and  one  more,  would  have  it  i 
in  their  power  to  arrest,  at  pleasure,  all  Episcopal  adminis-  i 
tration  in  the  diocese. 

The  fourth  objection  rested  on  the  charge  of  surprise 
,  i  and  management.  Nothing  of  these  was  apparent  on  the 
journal.  They  are  not  a  ground  on  which  an  election  may  be 
set  aside.  In  the  collision  of  parties  they  are  commonly 
charged  by  each  on  the  other.  On  the  present  occasion, 
no  specific  facts  were  alleged,  and  no  evidence  was  offered. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  -269 

On  the  whole  subject  of  the  objections,  the  bishops  were 
of  opinion,  that  if  the  substance  of  the  protest  was  designed 
to  arrest  the  consecration,  it  ought  to  have  been  communi- 
cated to  the  convention  by  which  Dr.  Kemp  had  been 
elected;  and  that  after  the  neglect  of  this,  the  defect  ought 
to  have  been  in  some  measure  supplied,  by  its  being  made 
known  to  the  bishops  called  on  to  consecrate,  that  the  in- 
strument, which  was  put  into  print  for  the  ease  of  multi- 
plying copies,  had  been  communicated  individually  to  those 
who  were  so  materially  interested  in  its  contents.  These 
remarks  were  designed  to  have  an  especial  bearing  on  the 
position  of  the  protest,  that  the  succession  of  the  bishop- 
elect  to  the  diocesan  Episcopacy  was  carried  by  accla- 
mation. The  bishops  were  possessed  of  evidence,  that 
the  question  was  put,  and  the  vote  taken,  in  the  usual 
form  of  conventional  business.  They  were  the  more  in- 
duced to  rely  on  the  testimony  to  this  effect  by  the  circum- 
stance, that  among  the  affirmants  of  the  contrary,  there 
were  some  who  were  not  present  at  the  disgraceful  trans- 
action, if  it  happened. 

In  addition  to  the  protest,  there  was  exhibited  by  the 
presiding  bishop,  a  letter  to  him  from  two  clergymen  of  the 
diocese,  charging  the  bishop-elect  with  being  unsound  in 
the  faith,  and  an  enemy  to  vital  godliness.     If  the  signers 
of  the  letter  had  substantiated  the  first  of  the  two  charges, 
or  the  latter  of  them,  in  the  sense  understood  in  Scripture 
under   the    term   "godliness,"   essentially   involving  reno- 
vation of  the  affections  manifested  in  the  fruits  of  holiness, 
the   bishops  would    have   rejected   the   application   before 
them,  from  the  respectable  diocese  of  Maryland.     But,  thex^ 
writers  of  the  letter  alleged  no  specific  facts;  they  referred  *' 
to  no  evidence;  and  the  accused  party  declared  that  they\v 
had^  not  even  notified  to  him  the  accusation. 

The  writers  of  the  letter  demanded  a  hearing  by  coun-' 
sel.     Setting  aside  the  insufficiency  of  the  applicants,  the 
novelty  of  the  proposal,  and  all  question  of  the  propriety 
of  such  a  precedent  to  be  set  by  any  three  bishops  who 


270  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

might  be  assembled,  it  could  not  but  occur  to  those  now 
present,  that  the  other  party  in  the  case  would  be  the  con- 
vention of  Maryland,  who  had  no  opportunity  of  being 
heard  by  counsel.  Had  Dr.  Kemp  been  considered  as  the 
other  party,  there  would  have  been  evident  impropriety  in 
subjecting  him  to  a  hearing,  under  a  charge  brought  against 
him  unexpectedly,  and  remote  from  his  place  of  residence. 
Perhaps  it  was  expected,  that  the  consecration  would  be 
delayed,  with  a  view  to  a  future  hearing.  But  neither 
ought  the  bishops  to  have  acceded  to  this,  when  it  would 
have  been  to  subject  to  reproach  the  character  of  a  clergy- 
man who  had  been  greatly  respected  in  the  diocese  dur- 
ing nearly  twenty-five  years,  and  this  at  the  request  of 
two  clergymen,  who  do  not  appear  to  have  hazarded  the 
charges  in  the  convention;  and  who,  in  bringing  them  for- 
ward at  this  time,  must  have  thought  differently  from  those 
who  joined  with  them  in  the  protest.  For  it  would  be  in- 
jurious to  the  religious  profession,  and  to  the  understand- 
ings of  the  latter,  to  suppose  that  they  had  withheld  those 
charges,  while  they  were  urging  objections  of  far  less  mag- 
nitude.* 

These  were  the  reasons  on  which  the  bishops  rested 
their  procedure,  and  they  were  detailed  by  them,  in  a  let- 
ter to  Bishop  Claggett. 

Soon  after  the  consecration  of  Dr.  Kemp,  the  object  of 
the  opposition  to  him,  as  it  was  cherished  by  some  of  his 
opponents,  showed  itself  without  disguise.  Fcmro£_fiye 
clergymen,  who  had  obtained  the  concurrence  of  some  re- 
spectable persons  in  that  preparatory  measure,  but  not  in 
what  followed,  applied  first  to  Bishop  Claggett,  and,  on  his 
refusal,  to  Bishop  Provoost,  to  consecrate  singly  the  person  ( 
who  should  be  elected  by  the  applicants.  It  is  not  neces-  ' 
sary  to  prove,  that  the  bishops  so  applied  to  were  men  of 

•  It  was  with  a  view  to  an  influence  on  the  question  of  the  election  of  Dr. 
Kemp,  that  the  story  concerning  the  election  of  Dr.  Griffith,  noticed  in  this  work 
(page  167),  was  handed  about ;  probably  fabricated  by  some,  but  certainly  be- 
lieved without  intentional  error  by  others. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  271 

too  much  truth  and  honor,  to  have  considered  for  a  mo- 
ment of  so  unprincipled  a  proposal.  But  the  matter  should 
be  remembered  as  pregnant  with  admonition.  A  bishop 
of  this  Church,  during  the  service  of  consecration,  after  ut- 
tering the  solemn  words — "  In  the  name  of  God,  amen," 
promises  conformity  and  obedience  to  the  doctrine,  the 
discipline,  and  the  worship  of  this  Church.  According  to 
the  application,  all  the  checks  designed  to  govern  in  ad- 
mission to  the  Episcopacy  were  to  be  disregarded. 

That  small  number  of  clergymen  exhibited  themselves 
as  competent  to  an  act,  to  which  they  had  recently  af- 
firmed an  incompetency,  in  two  thirds  of  the  clergy  and 
representatives  of  the  laity,  in  convention.  And  all  this 
was  under  the  profession  of  serving  the  cause  of  vital 
godliness. 

On  the  subject  of  a  theological  school,  discussed  in  the 
General  Convention,  as  set  forth  on  the  journal,  a  plan, 
different  from  that  adopted,  was  recommended  by  the  con- 
vention of  Pennsylvania.  It  was  as  follows:— 

"  1st.  That  there  be  a  recommendation  to  the  Church  in 
the  several  states,  to  raise  a  fund,  the  income  of  which  may 
be  applied,  as  the  general  wisdom  of  the  Church  may 
direct. 

"  2dly.  That  wherever  there  is  such  a  concentration  of 
clergymen,  as  that  they  can  assemble  often,  and  at  con- 
venient times,  they  may  be  requested  to  bestow  their  en- 
deavors gratuitously,  for  the  accomplishing  of  the  present 
object;  and, 

"  3dly.  That  the  income  of  the  contemplated  funds  be 
applied  to  such  local  endeavors,  if  thought  expedient,  so 
as  to  secure  the  especial  attention  of  one  or  more  of  the 
clergy,  to  be  devoted  altogether,  or  in  part,  to  the  educa- 
ting of  young  men  for  the  ministry,  until  a  general  plan  be 
adopted,  if  that  should  be  considered  hereafter  as  more 
eligible." 

The  reasons  which  weighed   to   the  preference  of  this 
plan,  were — the  time  intervening  between  one  convention 


272  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

and  another — the  expediency  of  limiting  the  views  of  that 
body,  to  what  is  essential  to  the  keeping  of  us  together  as 
one  Church — the  danger  of  local  jealousies,  and — the  easier 
maintenance  of  students,  under  their  paternal  roofs:  which 
would  not  always  apply  according  to  either  of  the  schemes, 
but  would  be  much  more  frequent  under  that  proposed 
than  under  the  other.  There  was,  however,  such  a  lati- 
tude left  by  the  suggestion  from  Pennsylvania,  as  that 
there  might  hereafter  be  a  general  seminary  grafted  on  it, 
cither  to  the  superseding  of  the  local  schools,  or  for  the 
finishing  of  the  education  of  the  scholars,  as  might  be  ex- 
pedient. It  is  to  be  hoped,  that  the  other  plan,  after  hav- 
ing been  generally  adopted,  will  be  universally,  and  with 
effect,  supported. 

On  the  subject  of  improper  amusements,  there  was  a  con- 
troversy of  some  warmth,  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies.*  In  the  House  of  Bishops,  there  was  unanimity 
in  the  course  taken.  This  course  as  recorded  on  the  jour- 
nal, and  including  some  sentiments  in  the  Pastoral  Letter, 
addressed  to  the  members  of  the  Church  generally,  and 
read  as  usual  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies, 
was  said  to  have  conciliated  to  their  disappointment,  those 
in  the  latter  house  who  had  pressed  for  a  stronger  measure, 
which  had  not  been  carried.  There  having  been  misrepre- 
sentations of  what  passed  on  this  subject  from  speakers  on 
each  side,  and,  as  what  finally  proceeded  from  the  bishops 
was  said  to  have  been  satisfactory  to  each,  there  may  be 
use  in  presenting  it  at  large;  accordingly,  it  is  given  in  the 
Appendix,  No.  31. 

•  The  House  of  Bishops  in  1817  was  composed  of  eight  bishops,  and  the  lower 
house  of  representatives  from  twenty-one  jurisdictions.  Bishop  White  says  that 
in  the  lower  house  there  was  a  controversy  of  "some  warmth  "  on  the  subject  of 
"  improper  amusements."  The  Journals  (in,  458)  show  that,  May  22d,  Francis 
S.  Key,  Esq.,  submitted  the  following  resolution  which  was  laid  on  the  table: 
"  Resolved, — that  the  clergy  of  this  Church  be,  and  they  are  hereby  enjoined  to 
recommend  sobriety  of  life  and  conversation  to  the  professing  members  of  their 
respective  congregations,  and  that  they  be  authorized  to  require  and  to  state  it.  as 
the  opinion  of  the  convention,  that  conforming  to  the  vain  amusements  of  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  273 

The  proposal  for  the  adopting  of  a  standard  edition  of 
the  Bible  was  in  consequence  of  the  discovery  of  a  large 
edition,  extending  very  widely  a  corruption  of  Acts  vi.  3, 
by  perverting  it  to  a  sanction  of  congregational  ordination.       I 
Instead  of  "whom  we  may  appoint   over   this   business,"     / 
which  is  the  exact  translation  of  the  original,  the  edition    ,• 
has  it  "whom/*?  may  appoint  over  this  business."     While 
the  matter  was  before  t He  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Dep- 
uties, a  lay  member,  standing  in  a  pew,  and  observing  a 
Bible,  took  it  to  turn  to  the  place  in  question,  when  he  per- 
ceived it  to  be  a  copy  of  the  edition  in  which  the  corrup- 
tion had  been  detected.     The  proposal  of  determining  on  a 
standard  edition  had  been  made  without  the  expectation 
of  its  being  acted  on  during  the  session.     It  was  closed  7 
with  a  joint  vote  of  the  two  houses,  to  hold  the  next  trien-  / 
nial  meeting  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  and  with  prayer  f 
by  the  presiding  bishop,  before  both  houses,  as  usual. 

Although  the  object  of  the  "Additional  Statements  and 
Remarks"  is  limited  to  the  proceedings  of  the  General  Con- 
vention of  1817;  there  being  no  subsequent  transactions 
which  have  bearings  on  the  doctrine,  or  the  worship,  or 
the  discipline  of  the  Church;  yet  it  may  not  be  irrelevant 
to  record,  that,  since  that  period,  there  have  been  conse- 
crated the  Rev.  Philander  Chase,  D.D.,  for  the  State  of 
Ohio,  and  the  Rev.  Thomas  C.  Brownell,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  for 


world,  frequent  horse  races,  theatres,  and  public  balls,  playing  cards,  or  being 
engaged  in  any  other  kind  of  gaming,  are  inconsistent  with  Christian  sobriety, 
dangerous  to  the  morals  of  the  members  of  the  Church,  and  peculiarly  unbecom- 
ing the  character  of  communicants."  The  next  day  the  resolution  was  called  up, 
and  the  following  substitute  was  offered  by  Dr.  How  and  adopted  :  "  Resolved, — 
that  inasmuch  as  ample  provision  is  already  made  for  the  purposes  of  Christian 
discipline  in  the  cases  specified  in  the  foregoing  resolution,  by  the  Constitution, 
Canons,  Kubricks,  Homilies,  and  Liturgy  of  the  Church,  it  is  unnecessary  at  this 
time  to  pass  any  resolution  on  the  subject  of  the  discipline  of  the  Church."  Thus 
in  the  house  the  matter  ended.  The  bishops,  however,  as  seen  (ante  p.  44,  and 
Appendix,  31)  brought  the  subject  forward  in  a  Pastoral  Letter.  In  1823  Bishop 
Philander  Chase  brought  the  subject  to  the  attention  of  the  bishops  again,  when 
he  was  referred  to  the  action  of  1817.  Ed. 


274  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  State  of  Connecticut:  the  former,  on  the  nth  day  of 
February,  1819,  in  St.  James's  Church,  Philadelphia,  by  the 
presiding  bishop,  assisted  by  Bishops  Hobart,  Kemp,  and 
Croes;  and  the  latter,  on  the  2/th  day  of  October,  1819,  in 
Trinity  Church,  New  Haven,  by  the  presiding  bishop,  as- 
sisted by  Bishops  Hobart  and  Griswold. 

As  the  act  of  the  convention  of  1785  was  authenticated 
by  the  signatures  of  all  the  members  of  the  body,  as  it  laid 
the  foundation  of  the  succeeding  transactions,  and  as  it  has 
never  been  given  in  full  to  the  public,  the  only  evidence  of 
it  being  the  original,  in  the  possession  of  the  author;  it  has 
appeared  to  him,  while  the  preceding  sheets  were  in  the 
press,  that  the  object  of  this  work  calls  for  the  editing  of 
the  instrument  in  its  proper  form.  The  address  to  the 
English  prelates  is  referred  to,  but  not  comprehended  in 
the  act,  delicacy  having  dictated  the  allowance  of  rea- 
sonable time  for  the  delivery  of  it. 

Neither  of  the  instruments  entitled  "  Alterations,"  etc., 
has  been  published  before;  although  the  results  of  them 
have  appeared,  in  what  has  been  called  the  Proposed  Book: 
but,  as  the  book  is  gradually  disappearing,  it  may  be  here- 
after important  to  have  an  exhibition  of  them  as  they  stand 
in  the  original  act.  The  constitution  as  then  proposed,  as 
ratified  in  1786,  and  as  done  away  in  1789,  is  in  the  book 
of  printed  journals,  but  not  in  any  preceding  part  of  this 
work. 

For  the  said  act,  see  Appendix,  No.  32. 

POSTSCRIPT. 

In  the  foregoing  statements  and  remarks,  the  more  im- 
mediate object  was  the  recording  of  facts,  throwing  light 
on  the  measures  of  conventional  bodies;  and  the  expressing 
of  opinions  which  arose  out  of  the  various  subjects  under 
notice:  the  opinions  being  proposed,  with  the  hope  that 
they  will  have  such  weight,  as  on  examination  may  be 
thought  their  due.  The  work  being  brought  to  a  conclu- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  275 

sion,  and  the  reader  being  qualified  to  judge  of  the  merits  of 
another  motive  to  be  disclosed,  it  is  now  declared  to  be  the 
conviction,  that  instruction  may  be  gathered  from  the  detail. 
1st.  On  a  retrospect  of  the  low  condition  in  which  the 
Episcopal  Church  had  been  left  by  the  revolutionary  war; 
of  her  clergy,  reduced  almost  to  annihilation;  of  the  novelty 
of  the  business  arising  out  of  the  existing  crisis;  of  the 
despair  of  many,  as  to  the  perpetuating  of  the  communion, 
otherwise  than  in  connection  with  an  establishment,  from 
which  it  was  forever  severed;  of  an  unwillingness  to  rec-  j 
ognize  such  a  severance,  although  brought  about  by  the 
Providence  of  God,  and  the  recognizing  of  it  agreeable  to  a 
prominent  principle  in  the  institutions  of  the  parent  Church; 
of  a  difficulty,  to  be  done  away  only  by  legislative  acts, 
which  perhaps  it  would  be  impossible  to  obtain,  and  which 
we  could  not  apply  for,  consistently  with  our  civil  duties; 
of  the  apprehension  of  conflicting  opinions  in  different  sec- 
tions of  the  United  States,  between  which  there  had  been  . 
hitherto  no  religious  intercourse;  of  the  existence  of  known 
differences,  on  some  points;  and,  with  all  these  things,  of 
danger  from  selfish  passions,  so  apt  to  intrude  under  im- 
posing appearances,  defeating  the  best  intended  endeavors 
in  collective  bodies;  it  must  be  perceived,  that  there  were 
formidable  obstacles  to  be  surmounted,  in  combining  the 
insulated  congregations  with  the  respective  clergy  of  those 
who  had  any,  under  an  indisputable  succession  of  the  Epis- 
copacy: and  with  an  ecclesiastical  legislature,  necessarily 
differing  in  form  from  that  under  which  we  had  been  from 
the  beginning,  yet  the  same  with  it  in  principle.  The  dif- 
ference between  what  has  been  thus  looked  back  on,  and 
the  present  circumstances  of  the  Church,  is  a  ground  of 
gratitude  to  Almighty  God.  In  what  degree,  this  change 
of  prospect  has  been  promotive  of  piety  and  of  correct  con- 
duct, will  not  be  known  until  the  day  which  will  "try  every 
man's  work,  whether  it  be  of  gold,  and  silver,  and  precious 
stones,"  or,  "of  wood,  and  hay,  and  stubble."  In  the  mean 
time,  we  have  encouragement  to  proceed,  in  humble  de- 


2-6  ^fE^fOIKs  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

pendence  on  Him,  without  whom,  even  "Paul  may  plant, 
and  Apollos  may  water"  in  vain. 

2d.  It  is  trusted  that  there  will  be  no  indecorum  in  re- 
calling the  attention  of  the  reader  to  the  absence  of  selfish 
passion  in  all  the  preceding  records  of  the  results  of  eccle- 
siastical legislation.  If  those  who  have  been  engaged  in 
the  proceedings  have  been  supposed  in  this  work  to  have 
fallen  into  error  in  some  instances,  it  is  hoped  that  the  no- 
ticing of  it  will  not  give  offence;  especially  as  it  is  by  one 
who,  in  the  same  work,  has  occasionally  acknowledged  er- 
ror in  himself,  and  who  is  ready  to  believe,  that  it  may  have 
happened  to  him  in  many  instances,  in  which  he  has  not 
sufficient  sagacity,  nor  sufficient  distrust  of  himself,  for 
the  detecting  of  it.  He  confidently  believes  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  conventions  generally,  that  they  have  been  ac- 
tuated by  upright  motives.  Of  his  brethren  in  the  Episco- 
pacy he  bears  testimony,  that  he  has  not  seen  any  occasion 
on  which  any  one  of  them  has  manifested  a  disposition  to 
sacrifice  principle  to  any  selfish  gratification.  If  there  be 
thought  correctness  in  these  remarks,  let  the  example  be 
influential  in  similar  proceedings  in  future.  In  all  the 
affairs  which  interest  the  human  mind,  there  is  the  danger 
of  estimating  measures  according  to  their  bearings  on 
some  purposes,  prompted  by  ambition  or  by  vanity.  The 
purposes  are  not  always  discernible;  and  there  can  scarcely 
occur  a  question,  on  which  talent,  even  if  it  amount  to  no 
more  than  cunning,  may  not  be  capable  of  drawing  to  itself 
a  party.  In  this  way,  there  have  arisen  most  of  the  dis- 
sensions which  have  torn  Christendom  into  sects.  As  yet, 
we  have  been  preserved,  by  the  grace  of  God,  from  any 
material  inroads  of  it:  and  the  noticing  of  the  fact  may 
serve,  among  other  weighty  considerations,  to  vigilance 
against  it  in  future  counsels. 

3d.  Another  lesson  arising  out  of  the  review,  is  that  of 
mutual  concession  in  small  matters,  and  even  in  regard  to 
others  more  important  yet  not  essential,  the  bearing  with 
what  may  not  be  approved  of,  under  the  expectation  that  it 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  277 

will  be  found  on  trial  better  than  had  been  expected,  or, 
that  it  will  be  corrected  after  more  mature  consideration. 
Of  the  latter  especially,  many  instances  have  occurred,  on 
questions  which,  without  such  forbearance,  would  assuredly 
have  divided  the  Church  into  communions  censuring,  and 
perhaps  perpetuating  hostility  to  one  another.  As  to  the 
other  branch  of  the  recommendation,  it  is  clearly  the  dictate 
of  a  due  consideration  of  the  various  casts  of  the  minds  of 
men.  It  would  indeed  be  surprising,  that  any  should  run 
into  the  opposite  error,  did  we  not  know,  how  unbending 
some  are  in  favor  of  their  own  opinions,  even  in  matters 
which  can  not  be  brought  before  the  tribunal  of  conscience; 
so  that,  on  a  question  of  taste,  they  are  impatient  under 
every  decision  not  conformable  to  their  wishes.  The  way\ 
to  bear  down  the  influence  of  men  so  fastidious,  and  under  I 
so  evident  a  propensity  to  disorder,  is  for  those  more  rea-/ 
sonable  to  make  sacrifices  to  one  another. 

4th.  It  will  be  a  most  important  use  of  the  review,  to 
notice  the  undeviating  intention  of  the  Church,  to  make  no 
such  alterations,  as  shall  interfere  with  the  maintaining  of 
the  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  as  acknowledged  at  the  reforma- 
tion. That  point  of  time  should  be  kept  in  mind,  in  order 
to  protect^the  Church,  not  only  against  threatened  innova- 
tions from  without,  but  also  against  others  which  have 
occasionally  showed  their  heads  in  the  Church  of  England, 
and  may  show  their  heads  in  this  Church,  betraying  a 
lurking  fondness  for  errors  which  had  been  abandoned. 
Neither,  have  there  been  wanting  some  among  us,  who 
would  have  drawn  our  system  towards  opinions  which  we 
ccmsider  as  an  approach  to  infidelity,  and  a  mean  of  rec- 
onciling the  mind  to  it.  We  were  under  the  suspicion  of  • 
intending  this,,  in  our  first  efforts  for  the  organizing  of  the 
Church.  It  is  impossible  to  verify  the  suspicion  by  any 
of  the  transactions  recorded,  or  by  any  of  a  more  private 
nature;  and  if  individuals  harbored  the  design,  which  is  not 
here  known  to  have  been  the  case,  they  saw  no  opening  for 
the  accomplishing  of  it,  and  accordingly,  permitted  it  to 


278  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

die  within  their  bosoms.  There  is  this  further  use  in  the 
reference  to  the  reformation,  that  it  frowns  disapprobation 
on  endeavors  tending  to  debase  our  forms  of  worship,  by 
the  intermixture  of  devotional  exercises  of  a  contrary  cast 
of  character.  How  far  this  abuse  calls  for  the  exercise  of 
ecclesiastical  authority,  and  how  far  it  may  be  borne  with, 
under  the  expectation  that  it  carries  in  itself  the  seeds 
of  its  dissolution,  is  a  question  partly  of  conscience,  and 
partly  also  of  religious  prudence.  It  is  a  property  of  the 
past  proceedings  of  our  newly  organized  Church,  that  the 
gold  found  by  her  in  possession  has  not  been  adulterated 
by  any  debasing  alloy;  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  she  has 
followed  the  counsel  given  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  to  the 
Jews,  to  "ask  for  the  old  paths"  and  to  "walk  therein."  In 
one  who  has  kept  this  object  steadily  in  view,  it  will  not  be 
thought  inadmissible,  to  express  his  wish,  and  to  put  up 
his  prayer,  that  the  same  integrity  of  principle  may  be  sus- 
tained by  those  who  are  now  his  fellow-laborers,  and  may  be 
expected  to  survive  him,  and  by  those  who  may  succeed. 

If  any  thing  were  wanting  to  confirm  him  in  his  senti- 
ments on  the  present  subject,  the  deficiency  would  be  sup- 
plied by  the  many  occasions  which  have  occurred  to  him, 
of  remarking  the  vanity  and  the  love  of  self-exhibition 
manifested  in  endeavors  to  the  contrary;  a  fault,  which, 
if  it  be  sometimes  seen  to  subsist  with  general  rectitude  of 
intentions,  is  only  one  instance  out  of  many,  verifying  our 
Lord's  reproof  of  another  species  of  misdirected  zeal — "Ye 
know  not  what  manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of." 

5th.  These  Memoirs  may  serve  for  a  check  to  the  un- 
necessary exercise  of  authority;  and  may  sustain  the  opin- 
ion, that  there  being  retained,  in  profession,  the  essentials 
of  Christian  verity,  and,  in  practice,  the  degree  of  sub- 
mission to  public  will  necessary  to  social  worship;  much 
of  what  is  made  the  subject  of  ecclesiastical  law,  may  be 
safely  left  to  the  diversity  of  sentiment  which  is  the  result 
of  difference  of  intelligence,  of  education,  and  of  constitu- 
tional character.  But,  as  in  an  army,  combination  of  force 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  2.79 

is  found  to  excite  their  courage  for  an  enterprise,  more 
hazardous  to  every  one  engaged  in  it  than  a  danger  from 
which  he  would  shrink  in  his  individual  Character;  so,  in  a 
representative  body,  a  member  of  it  is  prone  to  calculate  on 
a  ^degree  of  submission,  beyond  what  he  would  have  imag- 
ined in  the  capacity  of  a  sole  legislator,  although  clothed 
with  authority  greater  than  that  in  the  other  case  supposed. 

In  the  estimation  of  discreet  persons  generally,  ecclesi-^ 
astical  legislation  is  thought  to  have  been  carried  too  far.  / 
What  the  author  sees  cause  to  lament,  is,  that  many  who 
acknowledge  this  fact,  and  who  are  ready  to  lay  unsparing 
hands  on  matters  formerly  established,  would  bind  on  the 
Church  something  new  and  needless,  and  likely  to  excite 
diversity  of  opinion.  They  will  do  this  with  good  inten- 
tions, and  without  being  aware  of  the  inconsistency.  In  a 
Church  having  the  secular  arm  for  its  support,  what  has 
been  mentioned  would  be  an  evil;  but  it  must  be  ruinous, 
if  it  should  be  dominant  in  a  Church  so  much  acted  on  as 
ours  by  opinion  of  persons  of  all  degrees  in  life,  under  an 
organization  as  it  were  of  yesterday,  and  therefore  not  j 
having  the  support  of  habitual  submission  to  its  decisions. 
In  these  circumstances,  independently  on  other  considera- 
tions, there  is  a  call  to  the  acquiring  of  a  weight  of  religious 
character,  not  only  in  the  Episcopacy,  but  in  the  other 
clergy,  and  in  the  lay  gentlemen,  to  whom  may  be  com- 
mitted the  important  work  of  making  changes  in  ecclesias- 
itical  institutions.  Even  with  the  advantage  of  such  a 
character,  let  them  be  aware  of  the  truth  of  the  maxim, 
that  one  property  of  the  art  of  governing,  is  the  taking  of 
care  not  to  govern  too  much.* 


*  During  the  convention  of  1789,  and  while  they  were  engaged  in  the  review 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  a  lady  of  excellent  understanding,  being  often 
in  the  way  of  hearing  the  subject  discussed  by  some  members  of  the  body,  ad- 
dressed them  to  the  following  effect — "When  I  hear  these  things,  I  look  back  to 
the  origin  of  the  Prayer  Book :  and  I  represent  to  my  mind  the  venerable  com- 
pilers of  it,  ascending  to  heaven  in  the  flames  which  consumed  their  bodies.  I 
then  look  at  the  improvers  of  this  book  in  " — (naming  some  gentlemen  not  want- 


2  So  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

6th.  The  last  contemplated  improvement,  is  the  sug- 
gesting of  the  hope,  that  the  time  which  has  been  spent, 
and  the  cares  and  the  labors  which  have  been  bestowed, 
by  some  who  have  gone  to  their  rest  from  their  labors,  and 
by  others  who  have  still  on  their  hands  a  part  of  their  work 
to  be  performed,  will  be  applied  to  the  proper  end — the  pro- 
moting of  truth  and  godliness.  In  every  age  of  the  world 
there  is  open  a  wide  field  for  exertions  to  this  effect;  but 
the  remark  applies  especially  to  the  present  period,  in  which 
there  have  occurred  extraordinary  and  successful  exertions, 
for  the  propagation  of  the  gospel;  partly  produced  by  for- 
midable combinations  for  the  destruction  of  it,  which  have 
been  overruled  to  events  in  contrariety  to  the  licentious 
principles  taught,  and  to  the  disorders  which  they  were 
intended  to  perpetuate.  Doubtless  we  are  to  ascribe  the 
issue  to  the  good  providence  of  God,  who,  in  a  variety  of 
ways,  "  makes  the  wrath  of  man  to  praise  Him."  In  Amer- 
ica, which  lays  open  immense  countries  to  future  popula- 
tion and  culture,  the  incitement  applies  with  extraordinary 
stress  of  argument;  and  while  it  should  prompt  all  the 
members  of  this  Church  to  put  forth  their  best  endeavors, 
each  man  in  his  sphere,  and  according  to  his  ability,  it  ad- 
monishes him,  to  be  himself  in  the  consistent  profession,  in 
the  practice  of  the  duties,  and  in  possession  of  the  consola- 
tions of  the  gospel;  without  which,  he  is  not  likely  to  be 
influential  over  others;  and  if  this  should  happen,  his  lamp 
will  be  without  the  oil,  which  is  necessary  to  prepare  him 
for  the  reception  of  the  spiritual  Bridegroom. 

\The  Additional  Statements  of  the  first  edition  here  concluded.'} 


ing  in  respectability,  but  very  little  furnished  with  theological  knowledge.) 
"The  consequence  is,  gentlemen,  that  I  am  not  sanguine  in  my  expectations  of 
respect  to  be  paid  to  your  meditated  changes  in  the  Liturgy."  Without  raising 
any  question  concerning  the  logic  of  this  speech,  can  there  be  a  doubt  with  those 
who  know  human  nature,  that  something  like  it  is  the  language  of  many  a  heart 
in  the  religious  world,  on  the  introduction  of  any  novelty  of  which  the  propriety 
may  be  doubtful  ? 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  281 


T.     Page  51.     Of  the  Convention  in  1820. 

The  reception   of  Bishop  Moore's  sermon,   appears  on 
the  journal  in  such  a  shape  as  requires  explanation.     The 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  passed  a  vote,  request- 
ing a  copy  for  publication.     The  House  of  Bishops  concurred   /\f 
in  the  vote,  with  the  addition  of  their  thanks,  which  had  ' 
been  omitted  by  the  other  house.     The  reason  was  the 
preacher's  having  made  baptismal  regeneration  one  of  the 
points  of  his  discourse.     Some  of  the  gentlemen,  and  espe- 
cially those  the  most  in  habits  of  friendship  with  him,  were 
displeased  at  this;  and  hence  the  resolve  on  the  Journal  of 
the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  that  it  will  be  in- 
expedient hereafter  to  pass  votes  of  thanks  for  sermons  de- 
livered before  General  Conventions,  and  to  request  copies 
for  publication.     The  author  believes,  that  with  the  ma- 
jority of  the  house,   this  resolve  was  owing  not  to  their  f 
dissatisfaction  with  the  doctrine  of  Bishop  Moore,  but  to  ) 
their  general  view  of  the  subject  of  voting  thanks;  which) 
may  have  suggested  the  apprehension,  that  dissatisfaction 
with  any  point  in  a  conventional  sermon,  be  it  even  in  the 
minds  of  a  few  members  of  the  body,  may  excite  an  angry 
controversy,  not  having  any  tendency  to  settle  the  matter 
in  question.     In  the  House  of  Bishops,  the  vote  of  thanks 
for  the  sermon  was  passed  unanimously. 

So  far  as  the  duty  of  a  conventional  preacher  is  con- 
cerned, the  author  is  of  opinion,  that  there  should  be  care- 
fully avoided  all  questions  on  which  the  sense  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church  is  doubtful:  but  it  is  to^be lamented,  that  r 
there  should  be  brought  under  this  head  a  doctrine,  which  ( 
we  have  been  taught  to  lisp  in  the  earliest  repetitions  of  our  ) 
catechism   whicK  pervades   sundry  of  our   devotional   ser- 
vices,   especially  the  baptismal  which  is  affirmed   in    our  > 
Articles  also;  which  was  confessedly  held  and  taught  dur- / 
ing  the  ages  of  the  martyrs;  and  the  belief  of  which  was] 
universal  in  the  Church,  until  it  was  perceived  to  be  incon- 
sistent  with  a  religious  theoryTthe  beginruEgrand  the  prog- 


282  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

ress  of  which  can  be  as  distinctly  traced,  as  those  of  any 
error  of  popery.  This  is  not  a  place  for  a  discussion  of  the 
subject,  but  the  author  has  spoken  fully  to  it  in  some  of  his 
publications. 

The  recorded  rejection  of  an  application  concerning 
psalms  and  hymns,  is  another  proof  of  the  utility  of  the  re- 
solve referred  to  of  the  convention  of  1814.  Jt  is  to  be 
hoped,  that  all  future  conventions  will  adhere  to  it.  In  the 
contrary  event,  conventions  will  have  the  weight  of  the  ex- 
amination of  many  books,  brought  before  them  by  authors 
and  by  editors  not  destitute  of  respectability.  Either  the 
examination  will  take  up  more  time  than  the  members  will 
be  disposed  to  bestow,  or,  on  that  account,  errors  will  oc- 
casionally be  sanctioned  through  haste.  And  what  they 
will  sanction,  may  unreasonably  be  branded  as  error,  which 
will  at  least  have  the  effect  of  unnecessarily  exciting  con- 
troversy. No  objection  was  made  to  the  selection  pre- 
sented; and  it  is  certain,  that  any  parochial  minister  is  at 
liberty  to  make  or  to  adopt  such  a  selection  from  the  metre 
book  of  psalms  and  hymns,  as  may  be  agreeable  to  his  judg- 
ment and  to  his  taste. 

In  regard  to  the  title  page,  and  the  disregard  of  the  due 
distinction  of  books,  noticed  in  the  Narrative,  there  have 
been  some  editions  inaccurately  set  forth.  A  little  reflec- 
tion will  show,  that,  from  want  of  precision  in  this  matter, 
there  may  result  much  confusion  in  the  public  proceedings 
of  the  Church. 

It  was  the  misfortune  of  the  author,  when  the  scheme  of 
a  theological  seminary  was  devised  in  the  convention  of 
1817,  to  differ  from  the  majority  of  both  houses,  as  to  the 
expediency  of  the  measure;  and  he  was  supported  by  the 
convention  of  the  diocese  of  Pennsylvania,  in  proposing  to 
the  General  Convention  a  scheme,  which  would  have  left 
to  local  seminaries  the  whole  concern  of  theological  educa- 
tion. From  the  time  that  the  contrary  sentiment  was 
adopted,  he  has  done  what  lay  in  his  power  for  the  carry- 
ing of  the  general  wish  into  effect.  It  is  probable  that 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  283 

time  will  decide  between  the  two  schemes,  on  the  question 
of  preference;  but  as  it  is  a  subject  of  increasing  importance, 
and  of  increasing  frequency  of  discussion,  he  will  state  his 
reasons  for  the  preference  given  by  him  to  the  plan  which 
he  unsuccessfully  proposed. 

1st.  It  has  been  all  along  his  opinion,  and  there  will  be 
more  and  more  ground  for  it,  in  proportion  as  our  ecclesi- 
astical organization  shall  be  operative  over  the  American 
territory,  that  the  authority  and  the  deliberations  of  the 
General  Convention  should  be  limited  to  matters  essential 
to  the  keeping  of  us  together  as  one  body,  and  requiring 
agreement  with  a  view  to  that  end.  All  enlargement  of  the 
jurisdiction  endangers  controversy,  and  of  course  division. 
In  "control  over  a  theological  seminary,  contemplated  by 
the  Church  at  large,  as  the  nursery  for  her  ministry,  there 
is  much  room  for  difference  of  opinion,  and  for  local  jeal- 
ousies. The  complexion  of  the  theology  taught,  in  refer-  / 
ence  to  subjects  on  which  there  may  be  considerable  diver- 
sity of  opinion  among  ourselves,  the  choice  of  professors,  * 
with  accommodation  to  such  difference;  the  sufficiency  of  *V 
the  professors,  in  their  respective  branches;,  and  other 
points  which  might  be  mentioned,  may  be  sources  of  ani- 
mosity pervading  our  communion.  Even  the  branch  of  it 
from  which  a  vacant  professorship  should  be  filled,  may 
sometimes  occasion  embarrassment.  In  the  civil  concerns 
of  our  country,  the  president  of  the  United  States,  and  the 
governor  of  every  state,  has  to  consider  not  merely  who  is 
the  most  proper  man  to  fill  a  vacant  office,  but  also  what 
district  is  to  be  gratified  at  the  time.  To  suppose  that  the 
same  circumstance  would  have  no  bearing  on  our  religious 
policy,  is  more  than  is  warranted  by  our  knowledge  of 
human  nature. 

2dly.  There  will  be  required  what  would  else  be  unnec- 
essary calls  for  the  assembling  of  the  General  Convention. 
For  although  there  may  be  trustees,  with  considerable 
powers  for  the  management  of  the  seminary,  it  can  hardly 
happen,  but  that  exigencies  will  arise,  in  which  they  will 


284  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

hesitate  to  assume  the  responsibility  of  acting.  It  is  a 
great  injury  to  the  essential  duties  of  the  ministry,  to  be 
unnecessarily  calling  the  ministers  from  their  respective 
spheres  of  action — setting  aside  the  expense  incurred.  We 
esteem  it  an  advantage  in  our  Church,  that  judicial  con- 
cerns, conducted  in  other  societies  by  legislative  bodies, 
are  acted  on  by  us  in  ways  which  do  not  require  their  being 
brought  into  assemblies  of  that  description.  "Why  should 
we  surrender  the  resulting  benefit,  of  there  being  very 
seldom  need  for  the  call  of  a  special  convention  ?  Per- 
haps in  time,  and  after  an  extension  of  territory  within 
our  connection,  it  may  be  thought  sufficient  to  assemble 
statedly  once  in  every  five  years,  instead  of  triennially, 
as  at  present.* 

3dly.  The  jurisdiction  over  the  seminary  must  be  partial 
and  unfair,  in  respect  to  the  comparative  influence  of  the 
different  sections  of  our  Church.     It  is  not  here  proposed  f 
to  lay  the  chief  stress  on  the  inequality  of  jDur  representa-  / 
tion,  and  its  being  out  of  all  proportion  to  our  respective  : 
population.     When   our   Church  was   organized,   it  would  \ 
haye_  been  hopeless  to  have  proposed  any  other  schemej  ' 
and  whether  it  can  hereafter  be  made  conformable  to  exist-  / 
ing  weight  of  numbers,  as  in  the  civil  line  by  the  federal 
constitution  of  1788,  must  be  left  to  time  to  determine./ 
The  difficulty  now  contemplated  is  of  a  different  nature,  is 

•  The  frequency  of  ecclesiastical  synods  and  councils,  for  purposes  not  touching] 
the  essentials  of  the  Christian  faith,  was  one  of  the  causes  which  produced  the! 
domination  of  the  Church  of  Rome.     In  the  fourth  century,  such  assemblies  were 
multiplied :  and  often  for  the  determining  on  questions  which  were  more  in  the 
province  of  metaphysics  than  in  that  of  religion.     What  added  to  the  evil  was,| 
that  the  emperors  defrayed  the  expenses  of  the  travelling  of  the  members.     At 
last,  the  burden  of  the  expense  and  of  the  waste  of  time  became  too  great ;  and 
then,  controversies  were  referred  to  the  bishops  of  the  four  principal  sees ;  and , 
finally,  it  became  still  more  convenient  to  bring  all  within  the  vortex  of  the  Papacj 
This,  or  endless  division,  was  necessarily  the  alternative.     The  former  will  not 
happen  in  our  improved  state  of  society,  and  with  experience  of  the  past.     But  the 
latter,  if  there  should  be  very  frequent  conventions,  extending  their  jurisdiction  over 
concerns  which  may  be  left  to  local  determination,  will  probably  proceed  indefi- 
nitely and  without  end. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  285 

an  immense   aggravation  of  the  other,   and   requires   the 
bringing  of  the  following  circumstances  under  view. 

The  establishment  of  the  General  Seminary  recognized 
the  possible  instituting  of  seminaries  supported  by  local  in- 
terest. It  was  well  that  this  matter  should  be  distinctly 
understood,  although  there  was  no  absolute  necessity  for 
any  declaration  to  the  effect;  for  it  is  a  good  civil  maxim, 
that  liberty  is  to  be  presumed  where  restraint  can  not  be 
shown;  and  it  is  an  unerring  maxim  of  Scripture,  that  ( 
"where  no  law  is,  there  is  no  transgression."  Besides, 
can  it  be  supposed  that  the  General  Convention,  possess- 
ing an  authority  as  it  were  of  yesterday,  and  under  the  ne- 
cessity of  considering  its  proceedings  with  the  utmost  cau- 
tion, and  with  tenderness  to  the  habits  and  the  prejudices 
of  a  people  not  long  accustomed  to  look  up  to  them  for 
rules  of  conduct,  would  have  wished  to  assume  an  authority, 
not  yet  exercised  by  any  large  communion  over  its  whole 
range  of  country  ?  The  Church  of  England,  conceives  of 
herself  as  deeply  interested  in  the  two  universities  of  that 
kingdom;  but  when  did  she  affect  the  government  of  them  ? 
In  this  country,  certain  societies  have  recently  given  the 
weight  of  aggregate  sanctions  to  seminaries  of  their  im- 
mediate creation,  but  although  much  longer  exercised  and 
obeyed  in  ecclesiastical  legislation,  they  have  not  ventured 
on  the  strong  measure  of  disallowing  seminaries  partially 
instituted  and  patronized. 

Accordingly,  there  must  have  been  left  room  for  local 
seminaries  within  our  communion.  Let  there,  then,  be  re- 
marked the  effect  of  this  on  our  concerns,  an  effect  dispro- 
portioned  to  any  obtaining  in  other  societies  which  have 
both  species  of  seminary  within  their  bounds. 

At  the  time  of  instituting  our  General  Seminary  there 
were  avowed  the  designs  of  two  local  seminaries,  and  how 
many  more  of  them  may  become  instituted  we  know  not. 
It  is  to  be  expected  that  they  will  principally  engross  the 
pecuniary  aids  of  the  districts  in  which  they  are  respectively 
seated.  Considering  the  consequent  rivalship,  and  perhaps 


286  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

hostility,  is  it  reasonable  that  such  districts  should  have 
an  equal  share  of  control  over  the  General  Seminary  with 
other  districts  by  which  it  will  be  supported  ?  Certainly, 
it  is  not,  independently  on  the  inequality  of  our  representa- 
tion. How  great  then  will  be  the  disparity,  from  the  two 
causes  in  combination  ! 

4thly.  It  has  been  not  uncommon,  that  a  young  man 
within  our  communion,  directing  his  views  to  the  ministry, 
has  been  supported  under  the  paternal  roof,  when  it  would 
have  been  difficult,  or  even  impossible,  to  provide  for  him 
in  a  distent  part  of  the  union,  and  to  pay  the  expenses  of 
the  many  journeys  which  it  would  have  required. 

5thly.  There  may  be  perceived  a  difficulty,  in  the  mass 
of  property  necessary  to  sustain  a  seminary  on  the  contem- 
plated plan;  a  difficulty  consisting  not  only  in  raising  it,  but 
in  rendering  it  so  productive,  and  at  the  same  time  so  se- 
cure, as  to  insure  the  support  of  a  collegiate  body  of  pro- 
fessors. In  England,  no  provision  for  literary  purposes  is 
thought  stable,  unless  vested  in  real  property,  let  out  from 
time  to  time  on  leases  for  years.  The  circumstances  of  this 
country  are  so  different,  that  no  one  thinks  of  getting  from 
land  rent  bearing  a  tolerable  ratio  to  its  capital,  or  of 
guarding  the  premises  from  deterioration,  unless  by  a  strict- 
ness of  personal  oversight,  not  to  be  expected  of  a  corpo- 
ration. To  pecuniary  capital,  there  are  two  objections — 
the  ease  with  which  any  portion  of  it  may  be  called  in,  be- 
cause of  some  pressing  exigency,  or  some  favorite  object, 
and — the  being  liable  to  be  reduced  or  annihilated  by  any 
of  the  national  events,  which  are  thought  to  justify  the  is- 
suing of  an  abundance  of  paper  currency,  occasioning  its 
depreciation. 

Perhaps  it  may  seem,  that  these  possible  evils  are  not 
confined  to  the  general  school,  and  must  even  be  increased 
by  there  being  several  of  the  local.  To  obviate  the  sug- 
gestion, there  shall  be  drawn  an  outline  of  the  plan  pro- 
posed for  the  latter. 

Although  no  diocese  would  be  debarred  from  instituting 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  287 

a  seminary  under  its  own  ecclesiastical  superintendence,  it 
is  not  probable,  that  the  privilege  would  be  exercised  in 
more  than  in  three  or  four  instances.  In  each  a  single 
professor  would  be  sufficient,  an  acquaintance  with  every 
branch  of  theology  not  being  too  much  to  be  found  in  one 
man  of  talents.  In  each  of  the  two  universities  of  England 
there  are  only  two  professors  of  divinity,  and  each  of  the 
professors  has  his  distinct  pupils.  It  is  here  understood, 
that  the  principal  labor  of  the  professor  would  be  the  daily 
examination  of  the  pupils  in  the  books  of  which  he  would 
enjoin  the  reading.  If  there  should  be  occasional  lectures, 
they  may  be  few,  and  for  the  purpose  of  inviting  general 
attention.  In  or  near  any  of  our  cities,  extraneous  provi- 
sion may  be  made  for  the  study  of  Hebrew,  and  for  other 
coincident  purposes. 

Such  a  school  would  call  forth  all  the  energies  of  the 
diocese  in  which  it  would  be  seated,  and  probably  of  any 
neighboring  dioceses  having  no  prospects  of  seminaries  of 
their  own.  A  fund  for  its  support  would  the  more  easily 
be  created,  and  the  more  vigilantly  managed;  and,  until 
the  obtaining  of  a  sufficiency,  a  partial  support  might  be 
annexed  to  a  parochial  cure.  If  the  idea  should  occur  of 
there  being  rival  and  even  hostile  seminaries,  the  answer 
is,  that  simple  rivalship  is  attended  by  advantages,  as  in 
the  instances  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  in  England.  Hos- 
tility would  be  an  evil;  but  may  as  easily  happen  between 
professors  in  the  same  seminary:  in  which  case  the  evil 
would  be  more  extensive,  and  productive  of  more  passion 
and  provocation. 

It  may  be  pleaded  in  favor  of  a  general  seminary,  that 
the  different  departments  will  produce  a  greater  mass  of 
learning  in  the  different  professors,  in  consequence  of  the 
devotion  of  each  professor  to  his  proper  branch.  But  this 
has  the  counterbalancing  disadvantage,  in  the  danger  of 
each  professor's  extending  the  claims  of  his  department 
too  far  to  be  consistent  with  the  necessary  limits  of  a  theo- 
logical course.  Doubtless,  as  well  in  a  theological  as  in  a 


288  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

philosophical  lectureship,  the  principles  of  the  professed 
branch  should  be  fully  taught,  but  it  becomes  a  matter  of 
prudence  to  draw  the  line  between  this  object  and  the 
knowledge  which  it  should  be  left  to  subsequent  reading  to 
acquire.  Besides  if  a  professor  should  possess  a  special 
aptitude  for  a  particular  subdivision  of  the  whole  subject  to 
be  taught,  it  does  not  appear  that  he  may  not  improve  his 
talent  and  gratify  his  taste,  consistently  with  due  attention 
to  the  other  subdivisions,  in  which  he  ought  not,  even  if  he 
were  no  professor,  to  be  imperfectly  informed. 

It  has  been  supposed  an  advantage  in  a  single  semjnary, 
that  the  pupils  will  be  sent  out  with  similar  views,  on 
points  concerning  which  some  shades  of  difference  are 
found  among  Episcopalians.  This  is  problematical;  and, 
on  the  contrary,  it  may  easily  happen,  that  diversity  shall 
be  gendered  by  shades  of  difference  among  the  professors. 
If,  for  the  avoiding  of  this,  there  should  be  a  strict  and 
jealous  scrutiny  into  the  faith  of  those  proposed  for  profess- 
orships, there  will  be  an  outcry  against  the  favorers  of  the 
dominant  opinion,  and  it  will  be  well,  if  there  be  not  some 
color  of  the  charge  of  persecution.  In  seminaries  of  other 
religious  societies,  the  differences  subsisting  among  them 
have  intruded  into  their  theological  seminaries,  although,  on 
the  litigated  points,  the  professors  have  been  of  one  mind. 

There  may  be  apprehended  the  rise  of  a  local  seminary 
in  which  the  instruction  shall  be  such  as  we  may  suppose 
not  the  best  calculated  to  make  the  most  of  the  natural 
talents  of  the  students.  May  there  not  be  the  same  disad- 
vantage to  them,  under  the  guidance  of  clergymen  not  ap- 
pointed to  the  employment  of  preparing  young  men  for  the 
ministry,  yet  not  forbidden  to  be  so  occupied  by  any  exist- 
ing regulation,  or  by  any  that  can  reasonably  be  made? 
The  only  remedy  for  both  of  these  evils,  must  be  in  the 
reputation  of  our  authorized  schools,  which  should  be  such, 
as  that  young  men  shall  feel  it  to  be  a  privation  not  to 
have  been  students  in  them;  an  effect  to  be  produced,  not 
by  any  possible  regulation,  but  by  the  influence  of  opinion. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  289 

Of  all  the  business  which  has  come  before  our  General 
Conventions,  the  branch  of  it  which  related  to  a  missionary 
(  society,  was  the  mpstjTiisrnanaged.  That  in  the  hurry  of 
the  last  day  of  the  session,  there  should  have  been  over- 
sights, was  not  so  wonderful,  as  that  the  most  palpable 
should  be  made  by  gentlemen,  with  whom  the  subject  had 
been  contemplated  for  some  months  before,  and  who  have 
unfortunately  brought  the  whole  scheme  under  what  the 
^  author  thinks  a  mistaken  suspicion,  of  its  being  an  intended 
[>  engine  against  the  institutions  of  our  Church.  There  were 
these  two  supposed  grounds  of  the  suspicion.  Although 
the  constitution  provided  that  the  trustees  should  be  cho- 
sen by  the  convention,  it  was_so  managed  that  the  bishops 
had  no  share  in  the  choice.  They  were  also  made  the 
president  and  the  vice-presidents  of  a  society  existing  in 
idea  only,  and  composed  of  all  the  contributors,  who  could 
never  be  constitutionally  assembled;  while  in  the  efficient 
body,  that  of  the  trustees,  there  was  no  provision  for  the 
presidency  or  even  the  membership  of  a  bishop,  and  no 
such  person,  if  permitted  to  be  present,  could  claim  a  right 
to  vote  or  to  speak  in  their  proceedings. 

When  the  trustees,  so  imperfectly  appointed,  assembled 
on  the  business,  they  saw  the  difficulties  with  which  they 
were  clogged,  and  that  a  society  so  constituted,  would  not 
receive  the  support  of  the  Church  generally.  Nevertheless, 
being  aware  of  the  responsibility  attached  to  the  fall  of  the 
design,  they  devised  ways  in  which,  with  the  advice  of  the 
major  number  of  the  bishops,  they  consented  to  give  a  be- 
ginning to  the  enterprise;  looking  to  the  next  convention 
for  the  sanctioning  of  their  doings,  and  for  the  supply  of 
the  manifest  defects.  This  sanction  was  not  obtained,  and 
accordingly  there  has  been  a  suspension  of  the  scheme. 
The  author  attended  all  the  meetings  of  the  trustees,  and 
bears  witness  at  once  to  their  zeal  for  the  object,  and  to 
their  concern  for  the  order  and  good  government  of  the 
Church. 


290  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

U.     Page  51.     Of  the  Convention  in  1821. 

The  thanks  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies 
were  voted  to  Bishop  Kemp  for  his  sermon:  but  this  was 
afterward  reconsidered,  and  the  thanks  withdrawn.  No 
objection  to  the  sermon  was  offered;  but  it  was  recollected, 
that  at  the  last  General  Convention  there  had  been  a  re- 
solve against  such  a  notice  of  any  conventional  sermon. 
The  matter  was  considerably  agitated,  but  the  former  re- 
solve was  persevered  in.  In  the  House  of  Bishops  the 
thanks  were  voted,  and  a  copy  of  the  sermon  was  requested 
for  publication. 

W.    Page  52. 

The  opposition  to  the  scheme  was  principally  from  the 
gentlemen  of  Virginia:  and  it  was  thought  extraordinary, 
that  having  heretofore  avoided  the  taking  of  any  interest 
in  the  General  Seminary,  they  should  now  manifest  so  much 
f  zeal  on  the  question  of  its  final  location.  They  avowed 
A  their  motive,  which  was,  the  apprehension  of  an  undue 
,  ascendency  of  the  diocese  of  New  York.  But  it  was  prop- 
erly argued  on  the  other  side,  that  this  was  guarded 
against  by  the  provisions  made,  relative  to  the  future  in- 
crease of  the  number  of  trustees.  At  present,  the  diocese 
of  New  York  will  have  nearly  half  the  number;  but  this  is 
owing  partly  to  the  legacy,  and  the  earlier  date  of  measures 
begun  in  that  quarter  for  the  endowing  of  a  seminary.  In 
addition,  it  is  notorious  that  solicitations  for  the  General 
Seminary  in  the  other  states  have  been  suspended  by  the 
circumstance  of  the  bequest,  and  by  the  great  variety  of 
opinion  which  has  existed,  as  to  the  measures  to  be  pur- 
sued in  consequence.  The  proper  preventive  of  the  undue 
ascendency  of  New  York,  if  it  be  supposed  to  be  fraught 
with  danger  to  the  Church,  will  be  the  bestowing  of  plen- 
tiful contribution  in  the  other  states:  and  to  this  there 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  29! 

is  great  encouragement  in  the  consideration,  that  in  fu- 
ture, while,  in  the  said  state,  it  will  require  $10,000  to 
entitle  to  an  additional  trustee,  $2,000  will  be  sufficient 
elsewhere. 

The  adopted  plan  had  the  entire  consent  of  the  writer 
of  these  remarks;  notwithstanding  his  reasons  heretofore 
given  for  the  diocesan,  in  preference  of  the  general  scheme, 
As  is  recorded  in  the  remarks  on  the  proceedings  of  the 
last  convention,  he  had  sacrificed  his  peculiar  sense  of  the 
subject,  to  that  of  the  Church  generally,  not  without  fore- 
bodings of  there  being  a  door  opened  to  litigation  and  to 
disunion.  The  prospect  of  this  seems  to  him  to  have  ma- 
terially lessened.  Still,  the  record  of  his  former  objections, 
if  it  should  hereafter  happen  to  be  known,  may  have  the 
good  effect  of  being  a  warning  against  the  apprehended 
danger. 

X.     Page  53. 

There  was  but  one  particular  in  the  scheme,  which  cre- 
ated diversity  of  opinion  between  the  two  houses;  and  the 
diversity  was  owing  to  the  not  perceiving  of  the  matter  at 
issue  in  all  its  bearings.  According  to  the  proposal  of  the 
bishops,  the  meeting  of  the  managers  was  to  be  annual;  at 
which,  it  was  thought,  executive  measures  might  be  put  in 
a  train,  which  needed  not  to  require  reconsideration  with- 
in the  time  prescribed.  In  the  other  house  it  was  referred 
to  a  committee,  who  proposed  quarterly  meetings,  and  a 
correspondent  amendment  was  sent  in  to  the  bishops. 
They  persisted  in  their  proposal,  and  the  amendment  was 
withdrawn. 

The  difference  was  of  more  importance  than  may  at  first 
appear.  The  bishops  residing  in  the  nearer  states,  were 
willing  to  attend  once  a  year,  but  not  at  the  risk  of  quar- 
terly deviations  from  what  might  be  then  enacted;  and  for 
the  preventing  of  these,  they  could  not  leave  their  dioceses 
so  often  as  was  proposed.  It  needs  not  be  concealed,  that 


29?  MEMOIRS   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

'  there  existed  a  jealousy,  not  without  cause,  of  some  gentle- 
men in  different  states,  who  might  wish  to  make  the  design 
,     hostile  to  the  peculiar  institutions  of  our  Church;  and  hence 
(    the  desire  of  securing  such  an  annual  assembly,  as  may  de- 
feat the  attempt,  if  made. 

K     Page  53. 

The  history  of  the  rubric  is  this.  In  the  English  book, 
after  the  ante-communion  service,  it  is  immediately  said 
— "here  follows  the  sermon."  As,  in  churches  in  our 
cities,  the  service  is  often  used,  without  either  sermon  or 
communion,  there  seemed  wanting  a  direction  to  justify 
the  minister  in  proceeding  to  the  blessing.  This  is  the 
plain  sense  of  the  words.  In  the  case  of  there  being 
either  sermon  or  communion,  the  places  of  their  being 
introduced  are  precisely  noted.  If  there  be  neither,  the 
minister,  if  disposed  to  do  nothing  without  rubrical  di- 
rection, might  be  put  to  a  stand;  and  to  prevent  this,  was 
the  design. 

But  the  notion  has  been  taken  up  lately,  that  in  the  use 
of  the  conjunction  "if,"  the  absence  of  the  condition  dis- 
penses with  the  command.  This  is  not  always  the  case. 
On  the  contrary,  if  their  be  a  prior  command  of  greater 
extent,  the  defect  of  the  condition  has  no  further  effect 
than  on  the  command  appended  to  it.  The  matter  may  be 
illustrated  thus.  The  executive  issues  a  command  to  a 
proper  officer,  first,  to  perform  a  certain  service  at  the 
place  of  the  delivery  of  the  command;  then,  to  proceed  to 
a  second  place,  where  another  service  is  to  be  performed, 
and,  finally,  to  go  on  to  a  third  place,  more  distant,  where 
also  there  is  to  be  a  specified  act  of  duty.  But  a  doubt 
occurs,  whether,  on  his  arrival  at  the  second  place,  some 
circumstance  may  not  hinder  the  performance  of  the  in- 
tended service.  On  this  a  second  command  issues,  that 
"if "any  such  circumstance  should  occur,  the  officer  shall 
proceed  to  the  end  of'his  destination,  and  to  the  act  to  be 


ADDITIONAL    S7*ATEMENTS.  293 

there  done.  How  irrelevant  would  it  be,  on  the  non-con- 
currence of  the  apprehended  circumstance,  to  say  that  the 
command  for  the  first  service  is  superseded ! 

The  matter  at  issue  is  analagous  to  what  has  been  sup- 
posed. If  there  be  a  sermon,  it  is  positively  directed  to 
follow  the  ante-communion  service.  Ifthere  be  no  sermon, 
but  the  communion,  the  latter  is  to  follow  in  like  manner; 
and  the  "  if"  has  no  force,  except  in  the  event  of  there 
being  neither  sermon  nor  communion. 

These  remarks  are  justified  by  Dr.  Johnson's  interpreta- 
tion of  the  conjunctive  particle,  for  which  he  substitutes — • 
"suppose  it  to  be  so" — "whether  or  no,"  and — "allowing 
that." 

The  rubric  was  made  at  the  review  in  1789,  and  no  cler- 
gyman then  present  is  known  to  have  taken  occasion  to 
drop  the  ante-communion  service;  which  is  very  extraordi- 
nary, if  this,  as  must  be  supposed  to  have  been  the  case, 
was  the  wish  of  the  major  number  present. 

The  contrary  interpretation  is  a  device  started  within 
these  few  years,  and  it  goes  to  render  almost  superfluous 
the  whole  body  of  the  Epistles  and  the  Gospels,  espe- 
cially those  for  the  holidays,  when  they  happen  to  fall  on 
Sundays. 

It  may  be  questioned,  whether  this  judicious  selection 
had  not  the  effect,  in  the  middle  ages,  in  preventing  the 
corruptions  of  Christianity  from  being  greater  than  we  find 
them  to  have  been;  for  when  it  was  rare  to  find  a  Bible  in 
the  hands  even  of  men  of  education,  these  precious  por- 
tions of  it  must  have  had  some  effect,  although  in  Latin. 
At  the  Reformation,  they  were  retained  by  the  most  re- 
spectable of  the  Protestant  Churches;  the  English,  and 
the  Lutheran  in  Sweden,  Denmark,  and  Germany,  and 
America;  all  which,  with  the  addition  of  the  American, 
continues  the  use  of  them  to  the  present  day,  and  with  so 
high  an  esteem  of  them,  that  in  some  of  those  Churches 
the  preacher  is  expected  to  take  his  subject  from  this 
selection. 


294  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

It  is  also  a  weighty  recommendation  of  the  ante-corn-  \ 
munion  service,  that  the  weekly  reciting  of  the  Ten  Com-  1 
mandments  has  been  always  supposed  to  have  a  happy  J 
effect  on  morals.*  / 

Z.     Page  53. 

The  former  table,  for  thirty-eight  years,  was  calculated 
by  the  author  of  these  remarks,  in  1785.  He  has  had  the 
mortification  to  find,  that,  in  four  instances,  his  computa- 
tions were  inaccurate;  but  it  has  been  some  relief  to  him  to 
learn,  from  Wheatley  on  the  Common  Prayer,  that  there 
is  precisely  the  same  number  of  errors  in  what  are  called 
the  sealed  books,  and  are  the  standard  of  the  Church  of 
England.  The  other  changes  are  as  follows: 

The  Table  of  the  Rules  for  finding  Easter  has  been  regu- 
lated by  the  change  from  the  eighteenth  to  the  nineteenth 
century. 

On  examining  the  Table  of  Fasts,  there  was  discovered 
an  oversight  of  the  committee,  under  whom  was  printed 
the  book  of  1790,  after  the  review  of  1789;  the  error  being 
continued  in  H.  Gaine's  standard  book  of  1793;  in  contra- 
riety as  well  to  the  Proposed  Book,  as  to  the  English  table. 
The  error  made  fast  days  of  the  Sundays  in  Lent,  deviating 
from  the  rule  of  the  Church  in  all  ages,  and  from  the  Table 
of  Feasts,  which  gives  this  name  to  all  the  Sundays  in  the 
year.  The  error  consisted  in  saying  "the  season  of  Lent," 
instead  of  "the  forty  days  of  Lent";  "wnich  words  were 
accordingly  restored. 

In  the  Calendar,  the  column  of  Golden  Numbers,  from 
the  twenty-first  of  March  to  the  eighteenth  of  April,  was 
omitted  as  useless.  This  rendered  it  unnecessary  to  retain 
a  note,  found  in  the  English  book  under  those  two  months, 
which  had  been  omitted  in  all  our  editions,  owing,  as  is 
supposed,  to  the  preparing  of  the  book  of  1790  from  an  old 

•  See  Journal,  General  Convention,  1821,  p.  651.   Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  295 

English  book  edited  before  the  change  of  style  in  1751,  for 
in  none  of  these  editions  is  the  note  found. 

The  report  presented  a  list  of  typographical  errors  in 
H.  Game's  book,  made  out  with  the  assistance  of  Mr.  Wil- 
liam Hall,  who  had  edited  the.  Proposed  Book  in  1786. 


A  A.     Page  54.     Of the  Convention  in  1823. 

The  writer  of  the  Narrative  and  of  the  Statements  dis- 
charged the  duty  assigned  to  him,  in  regard  to  the  points 
presented  by  Bishop  Chase,  agreeably  to  what  was  con- 
ceived to  be  substantially  the  sense  of  the  bishops. 

The  first  point  was  a  proposal  for  the  appointment  of 
an  order  of  persons  to  teach  in  common  schools,  and  au- 
thorized to  read,  to  pray,  and  to  catechize  on  Sundays. 
To  this  the  answer  was,  that  if  such  power  should  be  de- 
pendent on  engagements  to  be  made  from  time  to  time, 
there  is  already  authority  to  the  purpose,  and  often  car- 
ried into  act.  But  if  a  permanent  character  should  be  con- 
stituted, it  would  look  like  an  addition  to  the  number  of 
the  Orders  of  the  ministry.  Secondly,  they  would  be  apt 
to  consider  their  appointment  as  a  stepping-stone  to  further 
advancement,  whatever  pains  might  be  taken  to  caution 
them  to  the  contrary.  This  has  been  too  often  a  conse- 
quence of-the  appointment  of  lay  readers,  without  the  -des- 
ignation of  permanent  character.  It  is  a  useful  expedient, 
and  not  to  be  laid  aside  on  that  account,  although  to  be 
resorted  to  with  circumspection.  The  plea  would  be  much 
stronger,  on  the  terms  of  the  proposal.  The  present  ob- 
jector has  thought  it  a  matter  worthy  of  consideration, 
whether  it  would  not  be  wise  to  ordain  some  deacons,  with 
an  understanding  to  the  effect  stated,  and  with  permission 
to  follow  secular  occupations:  the  service  to  undergo  a  few 
corresponding  alterations.  The  only  discouragement  to 
his  mind  is  the  danger  now  noticed,  and  the  apprehension 
that  it  might  tend  to  the  lessening  of  the  literary  character 


296  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

jr 

of  our  ^ministry,  it  being  presumable  that  there  would  be 
exacted  a  less  measure  of  literary  attainments  in  deacons 
admitted*«nder  the  conditions  stated.  Whether  the  good 
would  not  predominate,  and  whether  the  abuse  might  not 
be  guarded  against,  may  admit  of  a  question,  but  as  to  a 
new  order,  the  opinion  was  decidedly  against  it. 

The  next  point  introduced  was  that  of  theatrical  enter- 
tainments, in  respect  to  which,  the  answerer  took  occasion 
to  develop  his  sentiments.  They  are,  that  the  theatre,  as 
it  has  always  been,  and  is  likely  to  be  always  conducted, 
has  a  general  tendency  to  the  corruption  of  morals:  not 
only  because  of  profane  and  indecent  words  and  sentiments 
in  some  plays,  but  because  vice  is  often  insidiously  set  off 
to  advantage,  by  its  being  associated  with  agreeable  and 
even  estimable  qualities.*  Still,  we  can  not  affirm  that  there 
is  sin  in  the  introducing  of  fictitious  characters,  for  a  fa- 
vorable display  of  sentiments  strictly  moral  and  instruc- 
tive: for  which  reason  it  would  seem  improper  in  a  cler- 
gyman, as  was  the  object  of  the  proposal,  to  repel  from  the 
communion,  for  being  present  at  a  play  not  containing  any 
thing  contrary  to  religion  or  to  morals.  If  it  should  be 
urged,  that  the  stage  is  sometimes  so  abuseo1  as  has  been 
admitted,  it  is  an  argument  which  may  be  transferred  to 
the  pulpit;  because  of  some  discourses  from  it  very  dan- 
gerous to  the  consciences  of  the  hearers;  if  not  in  the  same 
respects,  yet  in  some  other.  If  a  communicant  should 
knowingly  be  present  at  an  exhibition  countenancing  vice, 
it  is  another  matter,  and  might  justly  be  made  a  ground  of 
exclusion.  On  this  subject,  Bishop  Chase  was  referred  to 
the  sense  of  the  bishops,  recorded  on  the  journal  of  1817. 

A  remaining  point,  was  the  pressing  of  a  requisition, 
that  the  lay  members  of  conventions  should  be  none  other 
than  communicants.  The  answer  to  this  was  the  decided 
opinion,  that  none  but  communicants  should  be  sent:  but  / 


*  See  ante,  pp.  44  and  272  for  other  declarations  on  this  subject.     Also  the 
Pastoral  Letter,  p.  425.    Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  297 

* 

whether  it  would  not  be  too  strong  an  act  of  government, 
and  may  not  best  be  left  to  advice  and  persuasion,  and  of 
even  these  to  be  governed  by  fitness  of  character  in  other 
respects,  may  be  made  a  question.     When   we  organized  • 
our  Church,  the  proposal  of  such  a  measure  would  have  \ 
stopped   us  at   the  threshold.     Whether  we  are  now  ripe 
for  it,  should  be  well  considered  before  the  making  of  the 
attempt.     One  great  discouragement  is  the  direction  given 
to  the  public  mind  by  the  use  made  of  the  same  test  in 
England.     Among  us,  it  has  been  gone  into  in  one  diocese    1 
only,  and  was  subsequently  abandoned.     Should  any  dio-   ' 
cese  again  undertake  the  matter,  they  would  seem  to  be 
competent.     These    were    the    answers    made    to    Bishop 
Chase:  and  the  responsibility  in  which  it  involved  the  pen- 
man of  them  induces  to  the  present  record. 


BB.     Page  54. 

Among  the  documents  delivered  by  the  writer  of  this, 
to  be  deposited  among  the  materials  for  a  future  history, 
was  a  body  of  transcripts  from  the  archives  of  the  diocese 
of  London,  made  by  Dr.  Alexander  Murray,  and  given  into 
the  hands  of  the  writer.  The  said  Dr.  Murray  had  been 
an  officiating  clergyman  in  the  province  of  Pennsylvania 
before  the  revolutionary  war,  and  in  the  service  of  the 
Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel.  He  made  the 
transcripts  with  the  view  to  their  being  of  service  to  those 
who  were  coming  to  England  for  consecration.  They  were 
of  no  service,  in  reference  to  that  object;  but  Dr.  Murray 
having  subsequently  returned  to  this  country,  where  he 
died,  the  transcripts  were  delivered  into  the  hands  which 
have  now  deposited  them  in  the  conventional  collection. 
The  preserving  of  them  may  contribute  to  the  doing  of 
justice  to  those  English  bishops  who  exerted  themselves 
for  the  extending  of  Episcopacy  to  the  colonies;  and  may 
also  show,  that  the  neglect  of  it  was  owing  to  the  indiffer- 
ence of  statesmen,  not  aware  of  the  importance  of  the  sub- 


298  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

ject  to  governmental  views;  and  doubtless  comprehending 
(what  there  has  been  given  reason  to  believe  in  the  Me- 
moirs) apprehended  danger  of  offence  taken  by  the  Dis- 
senters; and  the  consequent  decline  of  their  support  in 
elections  to  seats  in  parliament. 

CC,     Page  54. 

The  canon  was  intended  for  any  case  of  insufficiency  of 
a  candidate,  in  classical  and  scientific  literature;  and  with 
the  view  of  arresting  him  at  an  early  period  of  his  intended 
devotion  to  the  ministry;  and  to  prevent  disappointment, 
after  considerable  time  spent  in  theological  study. 

DD.     Page  55. 

The  report  of  the  society  shows  too  clearly  that  the 
executive  committee  have  not  been  so  supported,  as  an 
establishment  by  the  general  authority  of  the  Church  gave 
reason  to  expect.  It  is  true,  that  there  have  been  since  in- 
stituted several  diocesan  societies,  which,  of  course,  ad- 
vantageously lessen  the  sphere  of  the  operation  of  the 
other.  This,  however,  ought  not  to  prevent  their  aid  to 
the  general  scheme,  in  consideration  of  the  many  states  in 
which  their  fostering  care  is  so  much  needed;  especially,  as 
the  known  existence  of  the  institution  is  a  cause  of  claims, 
which,  as  matters  are,  can  not  be  complied  with. 

EE.    Page  55. 

In  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  there  were 
some  members  from  Virginia  very  ardent  in  pressing  on 
the  convention  the  concerns  of  the  Colonization  Society. 
It  may  be  perceived  that  the  proposal  was  waived,  on  the 
ground  that  it  was  rather  of  a  political  than  of  a  religious 
nature.  In  addition  to  this,  there  exists  in  the  community 
of  Pennsylvania,  and  probably  elsewhere,  a  variety  of  opin- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.,  299 

ion  on  the  subject;  many  contending  that  the  object  is  not 
the  lessening  of  the  evil  of  slavery,  but  the  getting  rid  of  a 
free  colored  population.  The  writer  of  this  believes,  that 
the  motive  of  the  men  prominent  in  the  design  are  pre- 
cisely what  they  profess.  Of  this,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  there 
will  be  gradually  a  general  conviction;  but  in  the  mean- 
time, it  would  be  unwise  to  take  a  part  in  a  controversy  on 
a  subject  not  within  the  sphere  of  ecclesiastical  legislation. 

FF.     Page  55. 

There  is  a  prevalent  sentiment  in  the  public  mind,  and 
perhaps  is  more  diffused  among  Episcopalians  than  among 
other  denominations,  that  collegiate  education  should  be 
without  regard  to  differences  of  religious  profession.  No 
wish  is  here  cherished,  of  obtruding  on  young  persons 
forms  of  profession  disapproved  of  by  those  who  have  lawful 
authority  over  them.  But,  in  a  country  where  every  de- 
nomination may  take  its  own  course  in  this  matter,  why 
should  there  be  lost  the  opportunity  of  instilling  religious 
principle  during  the  season  in  which  it  is  the  most  likely  to 
be  effectual  ?  If  this  is  to  be  done,  it  must  be  in  some  form, 
and  they  who  take  a  broader  ground,  never  act  consistently 
with  what  they  profess.  Those  societies  flourish  most  who 
are  aware  of  this,  and  who  therefore  conduct  religious  edu- 
cation conformably  with  their  respective  plans  of  doctrine, 
of  discipline,  and  of  worship. 


GG.     Page  57.     Of  the  Convention  in  1826. 

The  proposal  was  considered  an  inconsistency  in  them 
by  some,  who,  in  so  judging,  did  not  distinguish  between 
their  sustaining  of  existing  rubrics,  and  the  inference  that 
there  may  be  some  changes  for  the  better — especially  in 
this  particular.  Of  the  morning  service,  the  bishops  were 
aware  that  it  consisted  of  three  services;  and  this  has 


300  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

occasioned^repetitions,  which    otherwise   would  not  have 
been   admitteB   by  our  reformers.     Further,    the    bishops 
knew  of  complaints  of  the  length  of  the  morning  service, 
coming  from  various  portions  of  their  respective  dioceses; 
and  they  had  witnessed,  with  sorrow,  a  wayward  disposi- 
tion in  many  of  the  clergy,  to  make  such  omissions  as  the 
fancies  of  themselves  or  of  some  influential  laymen  might 
suggest.     It  was  thought,  that,  by  a  moderate  measure  of  •, 
compliance   with  existing  circumstances,   there   might   be  \ 
the  effect  of  giving  a  check  to  those  extravagances. 

As  for  the  reluctance  to  the  deviating  in  any  instance 
from  the  old  paths,  it  seems  to  have  been  worthy  of  consid- 
eration, that  there  is  a  higher  antiquity  than  that  pleaded.  ( 
It  has  been  stated,  that  the  morning  prayer,  and  the  Com- 
munion Service,  were  designe~cT  Tor  different  hours  of  the 
day      Besides,  the  former,  as  at  first  established  and  used, 
was  without  the  initiatory  sentences,  the  exhortation,  the 
confession,  and  the  absolution;  which  is  not  now  noticed, 
as  aTBenial  of  the  expediency  of  the  introduction  of  them. 
The  prayer  for  the  king,  that  for  the  rest  of  the  royal  family,  /  - 
that  for  the  clergy  and  people,  and  the  two  final  prayers,  ' 
were  not  in  the  morning  service,  until  the  reign  of  Charles  *2  ^2- 
II. — more  than  a  century  after  the  compiling  of  the  service;  ^ 
Trie  conclusion  of  it,  until  then,  being  with  the  collect  for 
peace.     At  the  same  period  was  composed  the  "  General 
Thanksgiving,"   ever   since  used  with    morning   and   with 
evening  prayer.     So  was  the  prayer  "  For  all  Conditions 
of  Men,"  to  be  used  only  when  it  is  allowed  to  omit  the 
Litany.     The  Communion  Service  was  without  the  Com- 
mandments; which  ought  not  to  be  remarked,  without  an  I 
acknowledgment  of  the  edifying  effect  of  the  introduction 
of  them;  and  when  this  service  was  used  with  the  compre- 
hension of  any  one  of  the  services  of  ordination,  the  prefa- 
tory rubric  did  not,   as  at  present,  require  the  precedent 
use  of  the  morning  service.     This  requisition  was  intro- 
//       cfuced  at  the  aforesaid  period,  and  has  added  greatly  to  the 
time  occupied  on  the  occasions  referred  to. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  301 

As  for  the  Litany,  although  it  was  a  part  of  the  Book  of  ( 
Common  Prayer  from  the  beginning,  it  does  not  appear  to  / 
hayejiad_an^early  introduction  into  the  use  of  the  morning  / 
service.    The  first  we  read  of  the  Litany,  from  the  beginning 
of  the   reformation,    is  the  command    of  Henry   VIII.  to 
Archbishop  Cranmer,  for  the  translation  of  it  into  the  Eng- 
lish, in  order  to  its  being  understood  by  the  people,  when 
usecMn  processions,  for  which  solemnities  and  the  like,  it 
was  originally  designed;  or,  at  least,  it  became  associated 
with  them  at  an  early  period. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  suggested,  that  there  would  be  a  re- 
moval of  all  difficulty,  if  there  were  introduced  the  use  of 
the  two  distinct  services  for  morning  prayer  and  for  the 
communion,  at  different  hours  in  the  first  division  of  the 
day.     But   if  this,    the   original    design   in    England,    was  J 
obliged  so  generally  and  almost  universally,  to  give  way  ( 
to  a  combining  of  the  two,  notwithstanding  the  demarca- 
tion of  the  parishes,  and  the  small  distances  around  the 
churches  within  which  their  respective  parishioners  reside,  f 
it  would  be  far  more  difficult  to  be  accomplished  in  America,  ? 
where,  not  to  mention  the  scattered  population  in  the  coun- 
try,  even  in  our  cities,    a   man's  relation   to    a   particular 
house  of  worship  is  not  a  proof  that  he  lives  within  a  mile    ' 
of  it;  and  in  general  the  greater  number  of  the  worshippers 
may   not   be  within  convenient  walking  distances,   to  be 
traversed  six  times  in  the  day.     Yet  it  is  to  be  wished,   ( 
that  in  future,  as  at  present,  the  form  of  the  Prayer  Book  ( 
may  be  such,   as  to  permit  the  severance  unquestionably  ( 
contemplated  by  the  compilers. 

It  may  be  said — why  not  then  dispense  with  the  ante- 
communion  service,  on  there  being  introduced  a  rubric  to 
the  effect  ?  The  answer  is — better  this,  than  the  leaving 
of  it  on  the  present  footing;  which  tends  to  the  producing 
of  two  different  books  in  substance,  and  eventually  in  form. 
But  it  would  be  far  from  tending  to  edification,  to  forego 
the  moral  use  of  a  weekly  recital  of  the  commandments, 
and  the  reading  of  selections  of  Scripture  adapted  to  the 


302  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHL'KCff. 

times  to  which  they  are  assigned,  and  of  such  early  use  in 
the  Christian  Church:  and  this,  for  the  abbreviation  by  one 
half  of  a  quarter  of  an  hour;  which  is  about  the  average  of 
the  time  spent  in  the  recital  of  that  portion  of  the  service. 

HH.     Page57. 

Had  there  been  an  accomplishment  of  the  wish  of  the 
bishops,  the  services  of  the  morning  would  have  been  ab- 
breviated, it  is  thought,  to  desirable  limits.  This  would 
have  been  conformable  to  the  purpose,  for  which  litanies 
were  originally  framed.  In  the  English  Church,  the  Litany 
stood  in  the  first  book  of  Edward,  after  the  Communion 
Service,  with  a  rubric  agreeable  to  the  sentiments  here  en- 
tertained; and  it  was  placed  between  that  service  and  the 
office  for  Baptism.  In  the  second  book  of  Edward,  it  took 
its  present  station,  with  a  rubric  extending  the  use  of  it  to 
Sundays.  For  these  facts,  see  Wheatley. 

Further;  the  writer  of  this  ought  not  to  be  backward  to 
confess  that,  however  convinced  of  the  propriety  of  the 
worship  of  the  adorable  Redeemer,  as  sanctioned  by  the 
Word  of  God,  he  considers  it  as  consentaneous  with 
the  same  high  authority  that  worship  should  be  princi- 
pally addressed  to  the  Father,  through  the  merits  of  the 
Son.  All  of  the  Litany,  between  the  first  four  petitions 
and  the  Lord's  Prayer  are  to  the  Son  exclusively.  At  least, 
this  is  here  conceived  to  be  the  correct  opinion,  and  it  is 
sanctioned  by  the  sense  of  the  commentators  on  the  Lit- 
urgy; although  there  are  some,  who  think  that  the  Father 
is  addressed  through  the  greater  part  of  it,  beginning  at — 
"We  sinners  do  beseech  thee,"  etc.  To  show  the  want  of 
consent  in  this  matter,  it  may  be  proper  to  notice  that 
when  it  was  discoursed  of  among  the  bishops  there  ap- 
peared an  opposition  of  interpretation  on  the  point. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  303 

II.     Page  57. 

It  must  be  acknowledged,  that  after  the  withdrawing  of 
what  the  bishops  had  contemplated  in  regard  to  the  Litany, 
the  abbreviations  are  very  inconsiderable.     Yet  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  perceive,  with  what  consistency  the  mere  permis- 
sion of  them  was  argued  against,  by  speakers  who  advo- 
cated indulgence  to  the  much  larger  extent  of  the  omission  S 
of  the  ante-communion  service;  not  because  they  considered  ' 
it  to  be  a  true  interpretation  of  the  rubric — for  this  they  une- 
quivocally denied;  but  on  a  principle  warranting  any  other*} 
omissions,  which  the  agents  are  ready  to  declare  to  be  rec-( 
oncilable  to  their  consciences. 

In  fact,  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  the 
debate  took  such  a  turn,  as  threatens  to  give  unbounded 
license  to  such  easy  consciences;  and  to  be  operative  on 
those  only  who  hold  themselves  to  be  bound  by  rubrics: 
for  this  was  a  construction  fairly  put  on  the  reasonings  of 
those  who  were  in  the  highest  grade  of  adherence  to  the 
integrity  of  the  service. 

KK.     Page  58. 

To  the  insertion  of  this  prayer,  there  have  been  made 
two  objections:  not  on  the  floor  of  the  house,  but  in  con- 
versation. The  first  is,  that  it  would  add  to  the  sanction 
given  to  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  confess- 
edly contained  in  the  original  prayer.  But  O  !  what  a  pur- 
gation must  there  be  of  our  Articles,  of  our  services,  and 
of  our  homilies,  if  this  prejudice  is  to  be  complied  with  ! 
The  other  objection,  is  its  not  being  expressed,  that  the 
petition  is  put  up  through  the  merits  of  the  Redeemer.  But 
it  is  the  same  in  this  respect,  with  the  present  prayer. 
There  can  not  be  a  more  evangelical  requisition,  than  that 
our  persons  and  our  devotions  can  claim  acceptance  on  this 
ground  only.  But  it  may  be  questioned,  whether  the  rec- 
ognition of  this  truth  constitutes  a  necessary  circumstance 


f 


304  AfEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

of  every  subdivision  of  a  continued  service.  In  the  prayers 
before  sermons  of  our  brethren  of  other  denominations, 
there  are  divers  subjects,  and  not  such  a  request  in  regard 
to  each  of  them.  The  great  truth  is  usually  recognized  in 
the  conclusion  of  the  prayer:  and  so  it  is  in  the  progress 
of  ours,  in  various  places.  The  compilers  of  our  Liturgy, 
took  the  prayer  in  question  from  a  Father  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury. If  there  be  weight  in  the  otJjertion,  it  oughFtoBe 
applied  to  the  dispensing  with  both  of  the  prayers.  We  put 
up  the  Lord's  Prayer  without  this  adjunct;  although,  doubt- 
less, with  the  implication  of  it.  In  Acts  iv.  24-31,  there  is 
a  prayer,  of  which  the  subject  matter  is  not  asked  through 
the  merits  of  the  Saviour,  although  He  is  recognized  as  a 
worker  of  miracles.  As  to  that  in  chapter  i.  24,  25,  it  is 
addressed  to  the  Saviour  Himself. 

LL.     Page  58. 

Concerning  the  subject  in  the  Narrative,  it  has  appeared 
to  the  writer  of  these  remarks,  in  regard  to  those  who  have 
pleaded  for  laxity,  that  they  have  uniformly  avoided  notice 
of  the  hinge  on  which  the  question  of  permitted  deviation 
principally  turns.  It  is  not  merely  that  the  same  is  un- 
rubrical,  and  a  violation  of  the  promises  made  at  ordina- 
tion; but,  that  the  interpretation,  if  acted  on  consistently, 
would  abrogate  the  use  of  all  those  selections  of  collects, 
epistles,  and  gospels,  any  of  which  may  apply  to  days  when 
the  minister  delivers  a  sermon.  This  may  happen  on  any 
week  day,  noted  by  the  calendar  as  a  festival  or  a  fast;  and 
actually  happens  in  every  church,  opened  on.  Christmas 
Day  or  on  Good  Friday.  The  writer  will  put  a  strong 
case,  existing  in  his  own  person.  For  many  years  he  has 
been  in  the  habit,  besides  a  sermon  on  Good  Friday,  to  de- 
liver what  he  has  called  a  lecture,  on  every  one  of  the  rest 
of  the  days  in  Passion  Week,  as  also  on  Easter  Monday  and 
Tuesday.  The  rubric  uses  the  word  "  sermon,"  and  not 
the  word  "lecture."  What  is  a  sermon?  "It  is  a  dis- 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  305 

course,"  say  the  dictionaries  (see  Johnson  or  Walker), 
"  delivered  by  a  divine,  for  the  edification  of  the  people." 
It  would  be  a  subterfuge,  in  any  clergyman,  were  he,  in 
order  to  avoid  what  the  canons  require  on  the  subject  of 
sermons,  to  call  his  discourses  lectures,  for  no  other  reason 
than  the  not  taking  of  a  text,  and  perhaps  the  speaking 
from  the  reading  desk,  instead  of  from  the  pulpit.  Here- 
after, some  clergyman  may  deliver,  on  every  day  in  Passion 
Week,  what  is  more  customarily  called  a  sermon,  as  is  done 
in  many  churches  in  England.  Such  a  clergyman  would 
more  conspicuously  commit  a  palpable  violation  of  the  ru- 
bric. Of  those  who  are  in  the  disuse  of  the  ante-commun- 
ion service,  it  is  not  probable,  that  there  are  many  who 
hold  worship  on  the  days  which  have  been  referred  to,  ex- 
cept, perhaps,  on  Good  Friday.  But  why  not  be  tolerant 
towards  those  of  their  brethren,  who,  if  they  should  adopt 
the  interpretation  contended  for,  must  abandon  what  they 
deem  an  edifying  improvement  of  those  days  of  humiliation? 

MM.     Page  58. 

It  will  be  pertinent,  in  this  place,  to  relate  an  incident, 
relative  to  a  matter  which  was  passed  unanimously  by  the 
bishops,  and  sent  to  the  other  house,  where  the  turn  taken 
by  it  dispensed  with  the  inserting  of  the  document  on  the 
journal.  It  consisted  of  various  reasons  in  favor  of  the 
construction  given  by  the  bishops  to  what  some  were 
pleased  to  call  the  dubious  rubric,  in  addition  to  the  rea- 
sons given  in  the  convention  of  1823,  and  entered  on  their 
journal.  The  additional  reasons  were  handed  in  with  the 
proposal  concerning  the  Liturgy,  as  in  its  first  form.  Of 
course,  when  this  was  withdrawn,  as  related  above,  the 
other  came  back  with  it. 

When  the  proposal  concerning  the  Liturgy  was  sent 
again  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  it  was 
accompanied,  not  as  before,  by  the  two  sets  of  reasons,  but 
by  a  canon,  explanatory  of  what  the  bishops  conceived  to 


306  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

be  the  true  sense  of  the  rubric.  In  the  mean  time,  the  rea- 
sons having  been  printed  by  the  order  of  the  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  they  were  in  the  hands  of  the 
members;  and  the  acceptance  of  the  canon,  together  with 
the  proposal  concerning  the  Liturgy,  accomplished  the  ob- 
ject for  which  the  reasons  had  been  drawn  up.  But,  as 
they  are  important  towards  an  understanding  of  the  trans- 
action, they  are  committed  to  the  Appendix,  No.  34. 

NN.     Page  58. 

Within  the  memory  of  the  author  of  this  work  there  has 
taken  place  a  most  remarkable  change,  in  reference  to  the 
subject  now  noticed.  When  he  was  a  young  man,  and  in 
England,  and  even  when  he  was  there  fifteen  years  after, 
he  never,  in  any  church,  heard  other  metrical  singing  than 
what  was  either  from  the  version  of  Sternhold  and  Hop- 
kins, or  from  that  of  Tate  and  Brady.  In  this  country  it 
was  the  same;  except  on  Christmas  Day  and  on  Easter 
Sunday,  when  there  were  the  two  hymns  now  appropriate 
to  those  days:  which  was  strictly  rubrical;  they  being  no 
more  than  passages  of  Scripture,  put  into  the  trammels  of 
metre  and  rhyme.  Of  late  years,  in  England,  an  un- 
bounded license  has  taken  place  in  this  respect:  and  even 
.  an  Archbishop  of  York  has  given  his  sanction  to  a  collec- 
'  tion  of  hymns  made  by  one  of  his  clergy.  The  like  liberty 
has  crossed  the  ocean  to  this  country,  in  a  degree. 

Let  not  the  remark  be  misconstrued.  The  present  writer 
has  no  leaning  to  the  theory  of  those  who  consider  all  sing- 
ing, except  of  David's  Psalms,  as  irreverent  and  irreligious. 
On  the  contrary,  he  is  in  favor  of  the  opinion,  for  the  in- 
troducing of  some  hymns,  expressly  recognizing  events 
and  truths  peculiar  to  the  New  Testament.  Still,  whether 
it  be  the  effect  of  mature  judgment  or  that  of  feelings  ex- 
cited during  the  earliest  of  his  years  within  his  recollection, 
he  declares,  that  in  respect  to  the  ordinary  topics  of  prayer, 
of  praise,  and  of  precept,  he  finds  no  compositions  so  much 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  307 

tending  to  the  excitement  of  devotion,  as  what  we  have  in 
the  Book  of  Psalms:  and,  as  they  are  the  effusions  of  in- 
spiration, he  ought  to  be  excused  for  his  reluctance  to 
doubt  the  correctness  of  his  theory. 

As  chairman  of  the  committee,  he  hopes  his  advice  had 
some  effect,  towards  checking  the  multiplicity  deprecated 
by  him,  although  not  to  the  extent  desired.  For  a  more 
full  manifestation  of  his  sentiments  on  the  subject,  he  pre- 
sents a  document,  read  by  him  to  the  committee,  and  now 
to  be  included  in  the  Appendix,  No.  35. 

In  this  concern  there  was  a  course  taken,  which,  it  is  to 
be  hoped,  will  be  imitated  in  regard  to  the  Liturgy,  in  the 
future  event  of  a  review,  if  this  should  happen.  It  is,  that 
after  a  preparation  of  the  work  by  a  committee,  consisting 
of  members  from  all  the  orders  in  the  Church,  the  conven- 
tion should  have  ojnly_to_s_tamp^on  it  their  yea  or  their  nay. 
Had  they  gone  into  the  consideration  of  the  sense  of  every 
hymn,  and  of  the  criticisms  which  would  have  been  made 
on  the  phraseology,  the  work  would  have  taken  some 
months  at  the  least.  All  were  sensible,  that  the  time 
would  be  longer  than  they  could  sit  together;  and,  there- 
fore, the  dissatisfied  members  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and 
Lay  Deputies  proposed  a  continuance  of  the  subject  to  the 
next  Triennial  Convention.  It  had  already  been  before 
three  bodies  of  this  description.  The  same  reason  would 
apply  at  the  meeting  of  the  next:  and,  unless  the  principle 
should  be  abandoned,  we  should  have  had  no  addition  to 
the  hymns.  Whether  this  would  have  been  for  the  better  or 
for  the  worse  might  be  uncertain;  were  it  not  for  the  license 
now  taken  in  many  places,  because  of  the  want  of  more. 


OO.     Page  59. 

The  two  canons  not  acted  on,   were  directed   against  { 
very  great  evils,  calling  for  immediate  remedy.     What  was 
proposed,  would  certainly  have  been,  in  substance,  accept- 
able to  the  members  generally  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and 


308  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Lay  Deputies.  But  some  of  the  members  having  proposed 
certain  amendments  to  the  first  of  the  two  canons,  impa- 
tience to  put  an  end  to  the  session,  caused  a  reference  to 
the  committee  on  the  canons,  previously  appointed  and  to 
sit  in  the  recess.  The  second  of  the  canons  would  have 
had  a  beneficial  effect  on  the  present  state  of  the  Church 
in  this  diocese.  There  would  have  been  no  need  of  the 
delay,  but  because  of  the  time  wasted  on  the  business 
which  is  to  follow. 

PP.     Page  59. 

There  has  never  been  before  manifested  so  much  pa- 
/  tience  under  tedious  repetition  of  the  same  sentiments,  in 
reference  to  a  point  concerning  which  a  considerable  ma- 
jority  were  of  opinion  from  the  beginning,  that  it  was 
foreign  to  the  purposes  for  which  they  were  assembled.  In 
three  previous  conventions,  there  had  come  forward  appli- 
cants, with  their  respective  schemes  relative  to  books;  and 
they  had  been  rejected,  without  examination.  In  the  first 
instance,  the  bishops  had  sent  to  the  other  house,  and  had 
received  their  thanks  for  it,  a  resolution  interdicting  all 
conventional  deliberations  of  that  description.  This  trans- 
action is  recorded  on  the  journal  of  1814;  and  the  principle 
has  been  acted  on  ever  since,  until  the  present  occasion/ 
It  is  to  be  hoped,  that  the  bad  effects  produced  by  a 
deviation  from  the  precedent  so  set,  will  prevent  the  like 
in  future. 

Although  the  scheme  was  rejected,  there  were,  among 
those  who  were  averse  to  the  reception  of  it,  some  who 
thought  it  good  in  itself,  and  worthy  of  the  endeavors  of  a 
society,  to  be  instituted  for  the  purpose.     The  writer  of 
this   was   of  a   different   opinion,   for   many  reasons.     His 
principal  reason  was,  that  either  there  would  be  an  addi 
tion  to  the  calls,  of  which  there  are  already  too  many  01 
the  clergy,  to  leave  their  respective  dioceses  and  parishes 
for  the  management  of  the  general  business  of  the  Church. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  309 

while,  as  to  the  lay  gentlemen,  we  should  have  no  proba- 
bility, that  they  would  leave  their  occupations  for  the  pur- 
pose. The  business  would  be  at  the  command  of  a  few 
gentlemen,  at  the  central  seat  of  the  measures  to  be  taken. 
The  writer,  in  consequence  of  much  experience  in  pecu- 
niary institutions,  connected  with  religion  and  with  litera- 
ture, has  witnessed  serious  losses  incurred;  sometimes  from 
neglect,  accompanied  by  the  purest  intentions  with  the 
most  unsullied  integrity;  and  at  other  times,  by  the  appli- 
cation of  public  stock  to  private  and  unsuccessful  specula- 
tions. He  is  therefore  reluctant  to  the  encouragement  of 
a  plan,  which  would  commit  to  such  hazards  the  large 
stock  contemplated:  when  the  disappointment  of  expecta- 
tion may  bring  indelible  disgrace  on  the  Church. 

QQ.     Page  61.     Of  the  Convention  in  1829. 

In  the  canons  of  the  Church  in  Tennessee,  it  was  pro-  k 
vided,  that,  after  a  trial  by  the  constituted  ecclesiastical  au-/H 
thority,  there  should  be  an  appeal  to  the  diocesan  conven- 
tion. This  was  judged  by  the  bishops  to  be  inconsistent 
with  Episcopal  government.  The  opinion  was  concurred 
in  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  without  a 
dissentient  voice,  so  far  as  appears. 


RR.     Page  61. 

The  author  of  the  present  work,  would  have  been  grati- 
fied by  the  alterations  in  the  Liturgy  proposed  by  the  last 
convention,  being  convinced  of  the  expediency  of  shorten- 
ing the  Sunday  service  for  the  morning,  consisting,  as  it 
does,  of  services  originally  intended  to  be  distinct,  and  of 
unintended  repetitions.  He  was  not,  however,  so  much 
dissatisfied  by  the  rejection  of  the  proposals,  as  by  the 
causes  which,  as  he  conceives,  conducted  to  the  issue: 
causes,  operating  as  well  with  those  who  objected  on  the 
general  ground  of  dislike  to  innovation,  as  with  others,  who 


310  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

were  dissatisfied  with  the  several  proposed  alterations.     The 
former  were  reluctant  to  the  decisive  measure  of  an  author- 
itative suppression  of  the  licentiousness  of  generally  omit- 
ting the  ante-communion  service,  where  the  omission  of  it 
was  owing  to  what  they  confessed  to  be  a  misconstruction 
of  a  rubric.     The  latter,  it  is  here  believed,  were  averse  to  < 
the  shortening  of  the  service  in  such  a  way,  as  not  to  leave  ( 
any  excuse  for  omissions  as  individual  discretion  may  sug-  ( 
gest.     These  opposite  opinions  may  be  considered  as  com-  ) 
bining  in  the  point,  of  there  being  at  last  no  established    . 
uniformity  in  the  use  of  the  services  of  the  Church.     It  is 
to  be  hoped,  that  the  providence  of  God  will  interpose,  for 
the  prevention  of  such  a  result.     To  the  author  of  these  re-'" 
marks,  the  only  expedient  seems  to  be,  as  was  suggested 
in  a  former  part  of  this  work,  the  appointment  of  a  joint 
committee  of  bishops,  and  other  divines,  jbr^ a  deliberate 
review  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  their  work,  when1 
finished,  to  be  laid  before  the  two  houses  of  convention, 
and  to  be  by  them  adopted  or  rejected  without  debate.] 
This  is  a  course,  the  nearest   that   circumstances   admit, 
to  the   compilation  of  the    Book  of  Common   Prayer   by 
the  reformers  of  the  Church  of  England,  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  VI. 

Perhaps  it  will  be  thought  by  some,  that,  on  supposition 
of  the  correctness  of  the  apprehensions  which  have  been 
expressed,  the  present  book,  if  continued  in  what  will  be 
called  its  integrity,  will  be  adhered  to  by  a  proportion  of 
the  clergy.  It  is  not  probable.  There  occur  to  many  of 
the  body,  the  most  correcFln  adherence  to  order,  many 
circumstances  inducing  to  abbreviations,  countenanced  by 
departure  from  original  design.  Such  clergymen  will  rec- 
oncile deviations  to  their  consciences,  by  the  consideration, 
that  it  is  unnoticed  by  the  constituted  authorities  of  the 
Church;  and  thus  they  will  become  accessory  to  the  result 
of  there  being  no  form  in  practice.  This  inconsistency  is 
known  to  have  happened  with  some  clergymen,  who  have 
declared  their  hostility  to  any  alterations  of  the  rubrics. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  311 

SS.     Page  63. 

The  objections  to  the  non-succession  of  an  assistant 
bishop,  maybe  comprehended  under  the  following  heads: — 

1st.  It  was  the  general  course  relative  to  a  coadjutor  or 
assistant  Episcopacy,  although  there  have  been  some  devia- 
tions from  the  general  practice,  and  although,  even  in  very 
early  times,  some  departures  from  the  practice  have  taken 
place,  of  which  there  was  an  instance  in  the  person  of  Greg- 
ory Nazianzen. 

2d.  In  the  circumstances  of  this  Church,  it  would  be  pe- 
culiarly unfortunate,  if  the  precedent  should  lead  to  her 
being  encumbered  with  bishops  not  possessed  of  dioceses. 

3d.  It  would  give  an  opening  to  factious  presbyters, 
whose  ambition  may  prompt  them  to  raise  parties,  with 
views  to  the  diocesan  Episcopacy;  and, 

4th.  That  influential  laymen  may  patronize  this  restric- 
tion, with  the  view  of  keeping  the  temporary  bishop  in  sub- 
jection to  their  control. 

There  may  be  proposed  the  question — why  did  not  these 
considerations  weigh  with  the  bishops,  so  as  to  induce  their 
refusal  to  consecrate  ? 

The  answer  is, 

1st.  The  convention  of  Virginia,  although  deviating 
from  the  original  and  reasonable  practice,  had  to  plead 
the  countenance  of  some  precedents. 

2d.  From  the  assurances  which  were  given  by  the  depu- 
ties of  the  diocese  interested,  it  was  confidently  believed, 
that  there  would  be  a  correction  of  the  error  at  the  next 
session. 

3d.  That  the  canon  passed  against  the  practice  by  this 
convention,  was  counted  on  as  a  barrier  against  any  further 
recurrence  of  the  evil;  and, 

4th.  That  the  convention  of  Virginia  could,  with  the 
less  reason,  resist  the  canon,  as  they  had  instructed  their 
deputies  to  move  in  the  General  Convention,  for  a  regula- 
tion to  govern  on  the  subject  in  future. 


312  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

It  was  known  at  the  time,  that  Bishop  Brownell  had 
determined  on  a  visit  to  the  western  states,  and  to  those 
south  of  Georgia,  under  a  mission  from  the  Domestic  and 
Foreign  Missionary  Society.  It  is  probable,  that  this 
prompted  the  proposal  contained  in  the  Narrative.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  contemplated  visit  will  contrib- 
ute materially  to  the  object  proposed  by  the  General  Con- 
vention. The  hope  of  this  result  is  considerably  strength- 
ened by  what  Bishop  Ravenscroft  has  accomplished,  in 
his  way  from  his  diocese  to  the  General  Convention.  He 
made  a  circuit  through  the  States  of  Tennessee  and  Ken- 
tucky, which  not  only  excited  the  zeal  of  the  scattered 
Episcopalians  in  those  states,  but  contributed  to  the  or- 
ganizing of  the  Church  in  each  of  them. 

There  was  a  singular  coincidence  of  the  assistant  bishop- 
elect  of  the  Church  in  Virginia,  and  that  of  the  assistant 
bishop  who  had  been  consecrated  for  Pennsylvania.  In  the 
latter  case,  the  consecration  had  been  strenuously  objected 
to,  on  the  ground,  that  the  convention  of  Pennsylvania 
had  no  right  to  elect  a  successor  to  their  present  bishop, 
while  living.  In  direct  contrariety  to  this  position,  a  Gen- 
eral Convention,  assembled  soon  after,  are  unanimously  of 
opinion,  that  to  choose  an  assistant  bishop,  without  the  in- 
tention of  his  succeeding,  is  an  act  utterly  indefensible. 
During  the  discussions,  the  matter  which  had  been  liti- 
gated in  Pennsylvania,  was  kept  out  of  view,  and  the 
name  of  the  assistant  bishop  was  not  mentioned.  This  is 
evidence  of  what  little  account  was  the  opposition  made  to 
his  consecration,  in  the  estimation  of  the  representative 
body  of  the  whole  Church. 

It  is  the  opinion  of  the  author  of  these  remarks,  that  the 
proceedings  relative  to  the  metre  psalms  are  unnecessary, 
and  fruitful  of  litigation.  Such  is  the  diversity,  not  only  of 
judgment,  but  of  taste,  that  be  the  selection  what  it  may, 
there  will  be  complaints  of  the  omission  of  some  passages, 
and  of  what  will  be  thought  the  injudicious  preference  of 
others. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  313 

Still,  there  will  be  urged  the  small  proportion  of  the 
psalms  in  use.  This  objection  is  easily  met.  The  metre 
psalms  make  no  part  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
There  may  be  editions  of  the  one,  in  severance  from  the 
other;  or  with  selections  from  it,  at  the  discretion  of  any 
parochial  minister.  Nothing  is  wanting  but  a  moderate 
measure  of  attention,  with  or  without  the  aid  of  consenting 
brethren,  to  a  printer  and  to  a  binder.  Different  selec- 
tions will  be  made  for  different  congregations,  without  just 
cause  of  offense.  The  selections  will  be  submitted  to  such 
choice  as  may  be  prompted  by  judgment  or  by  caprice, 
to  be  bound  in  the  same  covers  with  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer;  and  they  who  do  not  like  any  of  them,  may  attach 
to  the  book  the  whole  body  of  the  psalms  in  metre. 


TT.     Page  67.     Of  the  Convention  in  1832. 

On  the  reading  of  the  journal,  without  the  knowledge  of 
an  exterior  cause  having  a  bearing  on  the  deliberations  of 
the  body,  it  can  not  but  seem,  that  much  time  was  unneces- 
sarily spent  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies; 
owing  to  the  blending  of  two  subjects,  one  of  which  might 
properly  have   been   dispensed   with.     Whether   a   bishop 
have  a  right  to  resign  his  charge  at  discretion;  and  when 
the  diocese  being  abandoned,  whether  it  be  not  a  duty  to 
supply  the  vacancy;  are  questions  resolvable  on  different 
grounds.     It  was  not  from  the  being  insensible  of  the  dif- 
ference, that  so  much  zeal  and  so  much  argument  were 
lavished  on  the  affirmative  of  the  first  of  these  questions. 
The  effect  was  the  result  of  opposite  opinions  held  rela-  / 
tively  to  an  event  of  thirty-three  years'  standing.     There  ' 
has  been  recorded  in  the  "  Memoirs,"  that  in  September,  ', 
1800,  the  three  bishops,  then  composing  a  house,  denied  ^ 
the  right  of  Bishop  Provoost  to  resign;   and  consecrated  ' 
Bishop  Benjamin  Moore,  only  as  his  assistant  and  succes- 


3 14  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

son*     It  has  also  been  noticed,  that  some  years  after,  on  < 
the  occurrence  of  an  unhappy  controversy  in  the  diocese  of  S 
New  York,  this  matter  came  under  the  consideration  of  the  1 
diocesan   convention;   which  refused   to  acknowledge  any  £ 
other   diocesan    Episcopacy   than   that   of  Bishop   Moore.  / 
Although  the  question,  as  regards  the  circumstances  which 
originated  it,  has  ceased  to  be  interesting;  yet  the  occur-    • 
rence  of  another  professed  resignation,  brought  again  into 
view  the  diversity  of  sentiment,  which  had  so  long  ceased 
to  cause  any  disturbance  to  the  Church. 

Although,  in  the  late  convention,  much  time  was  lost 
in  the  consequent  discussion;  yet  it  will  result  in  benefit  to 
the  Church,  if  the  Thirty-second  Canon,  which  was  the  fruit 
of  it,  should  be  efficient  in  guarding  against  resignations, 
not  induced  by  exterior  necessity,  or  by  some  other  extra- 
ordinary consideration;  and  not  resting  altogether  on  the 
will  of  the  party,  for  the  consummating  of  the  act.  The 
threatened  danger  is  not  only  that  of  giving  occasion  to 
faction  excited  and  conducted  by  clerical  ambition,  and 
that  of  coveting  the  Episcopal  grade,  with  the  design  of 
being  speedily  disengaged  from  its  labors;  but  may  have 
unforeseen  consequences,  by  the  sanction  which  it  extends 
to  a  very  pernicious  assumption  of  the  Papacy.  The  ad- 
vocates of  the  right  of  resignation  constantly  affirm,  that 
there  is  a  distinction  between  office  and  jurisdiction.  The 
primitive  Church  knew  nothing  of  this.  It  was  a  notion 
started  by  those  called  the  schoolmen,  and  seized  by  the 
gopes,  to  favor  the  position  that  all  jurisdiction  is  from 
them.  This  was  the  shield  opposed  to  what  a  great  pro-  f 
portion,  probably  a  majority  of  the  body,  anxiously  desired,  < 
but  could  not  accomplish — a  determination  in  favor  of  the  ( 
divine  institution  of  Episcopacy. 

On  the  case  of  Bishop  Chase,  it  ought  to  be  noticed, 
that  there  was  given  in  to  both  houses,  a  protest  against 
the  considering  of  him  as  severed  from  th«T diocese;  signed 

•  See  ante  p.  31.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  315 

by  some  members  of  the  Church  in  Ohio,  including  one  of 
the  clergy.  It  did  not  appear  that  the  sentiment  was  of 
such  extent  as  to  claim  an  influence  on  the  proceedings 
of  the  body.  % 

UU.     Page  68. 

It  may  be  hoped,  that  no  one  will  censure  the  bishops, 
because  of  their  declining  to  exercise  a  visitatorial  power, 
in  their  aggregate  capacity.  The  notion  that  they  should 
be  called  from  their  dioceses,  on  any  of  the  innumerable 
cases  of  appeal,  which  may  occur  in  such  an  institution,  is 
too  extravagant  to  be  reasonably  entertained.  There  has 
been  already  an  appeal  to  them,  on  the  constitutionality 
of  the  sale  of  a  body  of  land,  of  the  propriety  of  which  they 
knew  nothing.  The  appeal  was  made  to  them  individually. 
But,  had  they  given  their  determinations  in  that  form, 
without  discussion,  and  without  a  comparing  of  their  opin- 
ions, it  would  surely  not  have  been  a  wise  expedient.  As 
to  the  other  proposal,  of  noticing  the  concerns  of  the  body 
applying,  it  was  perhaps  from  some  oversight,  that  a  copy 
of  the  proceedings  was  not  sent.  It  ought  not  to  be  sup- 
posed, that  the  General  Convention  was  expected  to  sanc- 
tion them,  in  utter  ignorance  of  their  nature  and  of  their 
tendency. 

It  will  not  be  foreign  to  the  purpose,  to  record  from 
what  cause,  there  originated  the  combining  of  the  presi- 
dency of  the  college  with  the  Episcopacy  of  the  diocese. 

When  Bishop  Chase  was  collecting  in  England,  certain 
contributions  were  made,  for  the  declared  purpose  of  found- 
ing a  theological  seminary,  to  be  always  under  the  care  of 
the  bishop  for  the  time  being.  This  feature  of  the  present 
institution  may  well  remain,  because  appendant  to  the 
Episcopacy,  on  such  terms  as  not  to  be  liable  to  be  exer- 
cised to  the  displacing  of  the  occupant  of  the  latter.  After 
the  return  of  Bishop  Chase,  there  was  instituted  Kenyon 
College,  enlarging  the  sphere  of  instruction.  This  pro- 


316  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

duces  the  incongruity  complained  of.  It  may  be  remedied 
by  a  legislative  act;  which  would  not  interfere  with  the 
faith  pledged  to  the  English  donors. 

WW.     Page  68. 

The  author  of  this  continuation  is  still  of  the  opinion, 
expressed  in  a  former  portion  of  it,  and  grounded,  npt  only 
on  the  discrepancies  of  different  judgments,  but  on  the 
variety  of  taste,  that  it  would  have  been  better  to  have  left 
the  whole  book  untouched.  In  this  case  every  parish  min- 
ister would  have  been  at  liberty,  either  to  cause  to  be 
bound  the  whole  of  the  said  book  with  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  or  such  parts  of  the  former  as  he  might  judge 
the  most  edifying  to  his  own  congregation,  and  to  any 
other  persons  who  might  prefer  the  acceptance  of  the  vol- 
ume in  that  form.  It  is  well  known,  that  in  this  Church, 
as  in  the  Church  of  England,  the  use  of  the  metre  psalms 
rests  entirely  on  the  ground  of  permission.  The  entertain- 
ing of  these  sentiments  did  not  prevent  the  author,  as  a 
member  of  the  committee,  from  giving  his  aid  to  the  per- 
fecting of  the  selection.  Further  it  is  not  intended  to  deny, 
that  there  may  profitably  be  a  review  of  the  whole  version 
of  Tate  and  Brady.  But  it  is  a  work  which  would  require, 
besides  other  qualifications,  a  very  exact  knowledge  of  the 
original  Hebrew. 

XX.    Page  68. 

The  most  beneficial  designs  are  liable  to  drawbacks. 
The  munificent  legacy  of  Frederick  Kohne,  Esq.,  although 
the  benefit  of  it  is  not  to  come  into  present  efficiency,  has 
led  too  many  to  imagine  that  the  institution  is  sufficiently 
provided  for.  It  will  be  to  the  dishonor  of  our  Church,  if 
the  trustees  should  be  under  the  necessity  of  anticipating 
this  fund.  At  present,  the  expenses  of  the  institution  con- 
siderably exceed  its  income.  Although  the  deficiency  will 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  317 

be  lessened  by  the  later  legacy  of  George  Lorillard,  Esq., 
of  $20,000,  to  be  paid  within  five  years;  yet  it  will  fall 
short  of  the  supply  which  the  state  of  the  funds  demands. 
It  ought  to  be  made  known,  that  the  seminary  is  under  the 
necessity  of  availing  itself  of  the  gratuitous  services  of 
some  of  its  professors,  in  whole  or  in  part;  and  that  of 
those  who  give  their  time  entirely  to  the  labor  of  instruc- 
tion, the  compensation  is  far  less  than  what  is  due  to  their 
talents  and  their  assiduity. 

• 

YY.     Page   69. 

The  rule  of  presidency  is  seniority  merely;  and  seniority 
is  to  be  estimated  according  to  the  dates  of  consecration 
respectively.  When  two  or  more  bishops  are  consecrated 
together,  seniority  Is  to  be  determined  by  the  dates  of  the 
election  of  them  severally. 

ZZ.     Page  69. 

At  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  all  the  churches  stood  ) 
east  and  west.  How  it  is  with  the  many  new  churches 
lately  built,  is  not  here  known.  Certainly  there  is  no  law, 
ecclesiastical  or  civil,  requiring  such  a  position;  and  it  may 
be  rendered  very  inconvenient  by  the  shape  of  a  selected 
lot.  The  origin  ascribed  to  the  custom,  in  the  expectation 
that  the  second  coming  of  our  Lord  will  be  from  the  east, 
has  been  proved  to  be  groundless,  by  our  improved  knowl- 
edge of  »the  heavens  and  of  the  earth. 

Still,  the  change  now  made,  although  agreeable  to  the 
spirit  of  the  rubric,  is,  in  a  slight  degree,  a  departure  from 
the  letter  of  it.  Perhaps,  considering  the  ground  on  which 
our  rubrics  authoritatively  rest,  it  would  have  been  better 
to  have  made  the  present  measure  interpretative;  affirming 
that  when  the  spirit  and  the  letter  of  an  instrument  are  in 
opposition,  the  former  should  govern. 


318  MEMOIRS   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

A  A  A.     Page  70. 

What  a  wonderful  change  has  the  author  lived  to  wit- 
ness, in  reference  to  American  Episcopacy  !  He  remem- 
bers the  ante-revolutionary  times,  when  the  presses  pro- 
fusely emitted  pamphlets  and  newspaper  disquisitions  on 
the  question,  whether  an  American  bishop  were  to  be 
endured;  and  when  threats  were  thrown  put  of  throwing 
such  a  person,  if  sent  among  us,  into  the  river,  although 
•his  agency  was  advocated  for  the  sole  purpose  of  a  com- 
munion submitting  itself  to  his  spiritual  jurisdiction.  It  is 
true,  that  the  subject  was  entangled  with  the  affirmed 
danger  of  subserviency  to  the  designs  of  the  government 
of  the  mother  country,  in  her  hostility  to  the  rights  of  her 
colonies.  Such  was  the  effect  of  the  combining  of  these 
two  opposite  interests,  and  so  specious  were  the  preten- 
sions of  the  anti-episcopalian  opposition  to  the  measure, 
J  that  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  have  obtained  a 
respectably  sigjied  lay  petition  for  it,  to  our  superiors  in 
England,  although  to  relieve  us  from  the  hardship  of  send- 
ing candidates  for  the  ministry  to  that  country,  to  be 
ordained.  When,  after  the  revolution,  it  was  hoped  that 
the  door  would  be  open  for  the  accomplishing  of  the  object, 
even  among  those  who  were  zealous  for  the  obtaining  of  it, 
there  arose  the  question,  whether,  in  deference  to  prejudice, 
there  should  not  be  dropped  the  name  oj  bishop;  and  the 
succession  be  continued  under  another  name. 

Behold  the  difference  of  result.     The  order  has  now  ex- 
isted among  us  for  nearly  the  half  of  a  century;  and  not  a  j 
single  complaint  has  been  heard,  either  of  usurpation  to  the  I 
injury  of  any  other  denomination,  or  of  arbitrary  govern- 
ment within  our  own.     If,  in  one  instance,  there  has  been 
made  the  charge  of  such  a  character,  it  has  not  been  in  the 
department  of  the  Episcopacy,  but  in  one  of  another  nature,  f 

In  regard  as  well  to  that  property  of  ecclesiastical  ad- 
ministration, as  the  Church  herself,  the  author  prays,  in 
the  words  of  Father  Paul,  of  Venice — "Esto  perpetua." 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  319 

EBB.     Page  71.     Of  the  Convention  in  1835.  • 

Bishop  Chase  had  become  severed  from  the  diocese  of 
Ohio,  by  the  circumstance,  that  in  the  constitution  of  Ken- 
yon  College,  there  was  the  provision,  that  the  presidency 
of  it  should  be  attached  to  the  Episcopacy.  The  para- 
mount anthority  of  the  institution  was  in  a  board  of  trustees. 
On  a  disagreement  between  them  and  the  bishop  in  the 
management  of  the  concerns,  the  latter  resigned  his  colle- 
giate station;  which  dre\y_ak?ngjwith  it  the  resignation^ 
the  diocesan^  Episcopacy.  This  fact  ought  not  to  be  re- 
corded, without  notice  of  the  impropriety  of  a  provision, 
subjecting  the  bishop  to  any  other  tenure  of  his  ecclesias- 
tical station,  than  that  provided  by  the  canons.  In  a  col- 
lege, without  any  charge  against  the  bishop  in  his  Episco- 
pal character,  there  may  be  dissatisfaction  in  the  minds  of 
the  trustees,  resulting  in  his  resignation  of  the  presidency, 
or,  he  may  be  dismissed  by  them.  In  the  latter  case,  he  is 
deposed  from  the  Episcopacy,  by  a  body  consisting  of  pres- 
byters and  laymen.  There  is  reason  to  expect,  that  this 
anomaly  will  be  corrected. 

CCC.     Page  71. 

The  writer  of  this  was  of  opinion,  that  there  would  have 
been  advantages  beyond  those  of  the  present  provision,  if 
the  choice  of  the  psalms  to  be  read  had  been  left  to  the 
officiating  minister. 

DDD.     Page  71. 

When  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England  was  framed, 
all  the  churches  stood  east  and  west,  with  the  chancel  at 
the  east  end.  In  America,  positions  different  from  this  are 
frequent,  there  being  no  law  to  the  contrary.  The  rubric 
certainly  intended,  that  the  minister  should  stand  at  the 
right  end  of  the  table.  The  author  has  always  acted  on 


320  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  principle,  that  the  spirit  of  the  rubric,  being  undeniable, 
should  be  preferred  to  the  letter.  But  it  was  expedient, 
that  the  latter  should  be  corrected. 

EEE.     Page  71. 

In  the  management  of  the  concerns  of  missions,  there 
was  no  other  embarrassment,  than  what  arose  between  the 
domestic  department  and  the  foreign.  The  former  has  the 
advantage  of  its  being  a  call  as  it  were  at  our  door,  with  its 
being  less  costly  than  the  other;  and  of  course  admitting 
of  more  to  be  done  with  the  same  amount  of  means.  Some, 
on  these  accounts,  would  have  confined  to  it  the  exertions 
of  our  Church.  Others,  and  it  is  here  conceived  the  greater 
number,  were  for  the  making  of  it  the  prominent  object,  in 
consideration  of  the  many  and  vast  waste  places  of  our  Zion, 
but  were  also  willing  to  apply  to  foreign  missions  what 
should  be  donations  so  designated.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  was  such  an  ardor  for  foreign  missions  in  some  minds, 
as  seemed  to  make  them  more  prominent  than  the  domes- 
tic, although  it  was  not  denied,  that  these  also  should  be 
sustained.  Under  the  executive  committee,  every  contrib- 
utor was  left  to  his  or  her  choice,  and  it  is  now  the  same 
under  the  Board  of  Missions.  Unfortunately,  with  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  subject,  there  was  mixed  the  question  of  the 
place  or  the  places  of  location.  In  the  result,  the  domes- 
tic was  located  in  New  York,  and  the  foreign  in  Philadel- 
phia, but  with  the  hope  of  many,  that  both  of  them  will  be 
settled  finally  in  the  former  city.  The  Board  of  Missions 
are  competent  to  this;  and  it  is  thought,  that  considerable 
advantage  will  accrue  from  a  concurrence  of  effort.* 

The  said  board  being  clothed  with  considerable  author- 
ity, and  their  doings  being,  in  a  degree,  the  agency  of  the 
Church  during  the  times  intervening  between  the  General 
Conventions,  it  is  thought  proper  to  insert  their  constitu- 
tion in  the  Appendix,  No.  36. 

*  Both  boards  are  now  in  New  York.     Ed. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  321 

FFF.     Page  71. 

This  measure  was  dictated  by  the  great  increase  of  pop-  /  o 
ulation,  in  the  lately  settled  counties  of  the  State  of  New 
York.  That  the  diocese  had  become  too  extensive  and  too 
populous  for  a  single  bishop,  was  generally  agreed.  But 
much  doubt  was  entertained,  as  to  its  being  now  the  wish 
of  the  greater  number  of  the  clergy  and  of  the  laity  within 
its  limits.  In  this  originated  the  measure  of  sanctioning 
the  principle  of  expediency,  and  of  referring  to  a  future 
convention  the  carrying  of  it  into  operation. 

The  author  of  this  work,  delivered  at  large  his  senti- 
ments on  the  above  point,  and  on  the  points  connected 
with  it.  His  views  were  committed  to  the  press,  in  the 
"  Protestant  Episcopalian,"  and  he  judges  it  to  be  agreeable 
to  the  present  design,  to  insert  that  document  in  the  Ap- 
pendix, No.  37. 

GGG.     Page  72. 

Within  a  year  before  the  convention,  it  had  been  ex- 
pected, that  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hawks,  during  the  session  of 
that  body,  would  have  been  consecrated  for  what  has  beeft 
called  the  South  Western  Diocese.  But  although  there 
was  evidence  that  the  measure  would  have  been  popular, 
yet,  there  being  objections  made  to  the  election  as  irregu- 
lar, the  doctor  declined  compliance.  During  the  session, 
there  were  present  from  that  quarter,  several  gentlemen 
who  had  regretted  the  failure,  but  were  gratified  by  the 
new  shape  which  the  subject  had  taken,  and  were  confident 
that  it  would  be  acceptable  to  all  the  states  and  territories 
concerned. 

HHH.     Page  72. 

This  measure  arose  from  the  consideration,  that  in  any 
country  to  which  the  Church  may  send  missionary  presby- 
ters, there  may  occur  the  expediency  of  superadding  the 
Episcopacy. 


322  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

HI.     Page  72. 

The  proposals  referred  to  are  of  great  importance,  and 
were  introduced  in  the  House  of  Bishops  by  Bishop  Hop- 
kins.    When    our    Church   was    organized   it   would    have 
been  impossible   to  have  carried  the  point  of  jurisdiction 
further  than  as  it  now  stands.     But  there  is  the  imperfec-£ 
tion  attending  it,  that  in  ecclesiastical  trials,  opposite  de-) 
cisions  may  be  passed  in  different  dioceses;  which  is  mani-f 
festly  a  great  evil. 

KKK.     Page  72. 

The  providing  of  a  German  liturgy,  arose  from  the 
statement,  that  in  some  districts,  there  are  German  fami- 
lies, desirous  of  attending  on  the  services  of  our  Church, 
and  whose  acquaintance  with  the  English  language  being 
imperfect,  as  expressive  of  devotional  sentiment  and  feel- 
ing, they  would  be  aided  by  the  possession  of  German 
Prayer  Books,  and  by  comparing  of  them  with  the  English. 

LLL.     Page  72. 

The  people's  repeating  of  the  confession  simultaneously 
with  the  minister,  renders  it  the  more  solemn,  and  most 
probably,  as  in  other  places,  was  contemplated  by  the 
compilers. 

As  for  the  question  of  "Amen,"  the  author  must  confess 
himself  not  furnished  with  sufficient  information.     He  does  \ 
not  know  any  rubric  or  canon  prescribing  the  difference  f 
of  type.     There  is  before  him  a  Prayer  Book,  edited  under 
Charles  I.,  in  which  no  such  difference  is  made.    In  another,' 
under  Queen  Anne,  it  appears,  not  only  in  the  places  des- 
ignated by  the  convention,  but  in  many  others;  although 
the  cause  of  the  diversity  is  not  obvious.     In  Baskerville's  / 
edition,  there  is  the  difference  of  type;  and  perhaps  in  all    , 
the  recent  editions  in  England.     It  is  to  be  hoped,  that  the 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  323 

convention  had  sufficient  cause  for  the  provision  made;  and 
if  not,  it  is  of  little  moment. 

Since  the  time  of  the  General  Convention,  there  has 
been  raised  a  question,  as  to  the  propriety  of  what  they 
have  required,  of  the  concurrent  voices  of  the  minister 
and  of  the  people.  The  doubt  of  the  requisition  rests 
on  the  meaning  of  the  word  "after,"  which  has  been  con- 
strued as  inapplicable  to  concurrence.  In  opposition  to 
the  doubt,  the  following  considerations  had  weight  with 
the  convention. 

1st.  The  exhortation  calls  on  the  congregation,  to  "ac- 
company" the  minister  in  the  ensuing  act,  which  can  not 
be  but  by  a  concurrence. 

2d.  There  was  not  perceived  any  reason,  why  the  con- 
fession should  be  different  from  that  in  the  Communion 
Service,  and  from  the  Lord's  Prayer  in  the  morning  and 
evening  services. 

3d.  The  word  "after"  can  not  have  so  restricted  a  mean- 
ing as  the  doubt  supposes.  It  often  stands  for  "accord- 
ing to  "  or  "imitation  of."  See  Johnson's  Dictionary.  See 
also  many  places  in  Scripture,  among  which  are,  Psalm 
xxviii.  6;  Psalm  xi.  3;  Matthew  vi.  9;  and  I  Peter  iii.  5. 
The  Prayer  Book  is  not  without  instances  to  the  effect,  as 
in  the  Twenty-eighth  Article,  "after  an  heavenly  and  spir- 
itual manner; "  and  in  the  Litany  as  in  the  English  book — 
"  neither  reward  us  after  our  iniquities." 

MMM.     Page  72. 

In  regard  to  the  -Bible,  there  having  been  occasionally 
typographical  errors,  so  difficult  to  be  avoided,  there  is 
great  reason  of  provision  for  strict  accuracy.  Some  years 
ago  there  had  been  a  very  large  edition,  in  one  instance 
departing  from  the  Greek  text,  in  order  to  favor  the  Con- 
gregatiqnal  form  of  Church  government. 

Although  there  had  been  provided  what  was  expected 
to  be  a  sufficient  preventive  of  incorrect  editions  of  the 


324  MEMOIRS   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Book  of  Common  Prayer;  yet,  the  provision  having  been 
found  not  entirely  to  answer  the  purpose,  further  security 
was  thought  necessary,  and  constituted. 

NNN.     Page  72. 

The  books  and  other  documents,  presented  by  Dr 
Hawks,  will  be  added  to  those  presented  by  the  author  of 
this,  some  years  ago,  and  now  in  the  library  of  St.  James's 
Church,  in  this  city.  It  is  to  be  hoped,  that  they  will  be 
placed  under  a  proper  supervision. 

OOO.     Page  72. 

It  is  remarked  often,  and  with  truth,  that  much  legisla- 
tion is  indicative  of  feeble  administration.  Still,  there  may 
be  fruits  of  experience,  and  changes  of  circumstances,  call- 
ing for  corresponding  changes  of  laws.  It  is  to  be  hoped, 
that  our  Church  has  pursued,  and  will  continue  to  pursue, 
a  proper  medium.  For  the  enacted  canons,  it  may  suffice 
to  refer  to  the  journal. 


CONCLUSION. 

The  author  has  brought  to  an  end,  a  work  comprehend- 
ing the  proceedings  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  for  somewhat 
more  than  the  half  of  a  century.  He  discontinues  it  from 
this  time,  partly  because  of  his  advance  in  years,  and,  fur- 
ther, because  he  knows  of  some  of  the  clergy,  who  have 
been  lately  attentive  to  the  preservation  of  facts,  falling 
under  their  respective  notices.  It  has  been  formerly  a 
matter  too  little  attended  to.  Incidents,  not  exciting 
much  interest  at  present,  may  help  in  future  transactions, 
by  unfolding  the  grounds  on  which  those  preceding  them 
had  been  adopted,  and  by  which  they  should  in  some 
measure  be  explained. 


ADDITIONAL    STATEMENTS.  325 

At  this  finishing  of  these  Memoirs,  he  lifts  his  heart  in 
prayer  to  the  Great  Preserver  of  his  health  and  strength, 
that  the  peace  and  the  prosperity  of  the  Church,  of  which 
he  has  been  so  long  a  witness,  and  to  the  promoting  of 
which  he  has  given  his  best  endeavors,  however  feeble, 
and  however  in  effect  far  short  of  his  desires,  may  be  per- 
petuated, to  the  glory  of  God,  and  to  the  best  interests,  re- 
ligious and  civil,  of  his  people. 

W.  W. 


III. 

APPENDIX. 


No.  i.     Page  85. 
Communication  with  the  Court  of  Denmark. 

Copy  of  a  Letter  from  John  Adams,  Esq.,  to  the  President  of  Congress, 
dated  the  Hague,  April  22,  1784. 

SIR, 

I  received,  some  time  since,  a  letter  from  an  American 
gentleman  now  in  London,  a  candidate  for  Orders,  desiring 
to  know,  if  American  candidates  might  have  Orders,  from 
Protestant  bishops  on  the  continent,  and  complaining  that 
he  had  been  refused  by  the  Bishop  of  London,  unless  he 
would  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance,  etc. 

Meeting  soon  afterwards  the  Danish  minister,  I  had  the 
curiosity  to  inquire  of  him,  whether  ordination  might  be 
had  in  Denmark.  He  answered  me,  that  he  knew  not,  but 
would  soon  inform  himself.  I  heard  no  more  of  it  until  to- 
day when  the  secretary  of  his  embassy,  Mr.  De  Rosen- 
crantz,  made  me  a  visit,  and  delivered  me  the  papers, 
copies  of  which  are  enclosed. 

Thus,  it  seems,  that  what  I  meant  as  current  conversa- 
tion only,  has  been  made  the  subject  of  the  deliberation  of 
the  government  of  Denmark  and  their  faculty  of  theology; 
which  makes  it  necessary  for  me  to  transmit  it  to  congress. 

I  am  happy  to  find  the  decision  so  liberal. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  etc. 
(Signed,)  J.   ADAMS. 


328  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Translation  of  a  Communication  of  Mr.  de  St.  Saphorin,  to  Mr.  John 
Adams,  dated  the  Hague,  April  21,  1784. 

Mr.  de  St.  Saphorin  has  the  honor  to  communicate  to 
Mr.  Adams  the  answer  he  has  received  from  his  excellency 
the  Count  de  Rosencrone,  privy  counsellor  and  secretary 
of  state  for  foreign  affairs  of  his  Danish  majesty,  relative 
to  what  Mr.  Adams  desired  to  know.  He  shall  be  happy 
if  this  answer  should  be  agreeable  to  him,  as  well  as  to  his 
superiors,  and  useful  to  his  fellow-citizens.  He  has  the 
honor  to  assure  him  of  his  respect. 
(Signed,  etc.) 


Translation  of  the  Copy  of  an  Extract  of  a  Letter  from  his  Excellency  the 
Count  de  Rosencrone,  Privy  Counsellor  of  his  Majesty  the  King  of 
Denmark,  to  Mr.  de  St.  Saphorin,  Envoy  Extraordinary  from  his 
Majesty  to  the  States  General. 

The  opinion  of  the  theological  faculty  having  been  taken 
on  the  question  made  to  your  excellency  by  Mr.  Adams,  if 
the  American  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England  can  be 
consecrated  here  by  a  bishop  of  the  Danish  Church  ?  I  am 
ordered  by  the  king  to  authorize  you  to  answer,  that  such 
an  act  can  take  place  according  to  the  Danish  rites;  but 
for  the  convenience  of  the  Americans,  who  are  supposed 
not  to  know  the  Danish  language,  the  Latin  language  will 
be  made 'use  of  on  the  occasion;  for  the  rest,  nothing  will 
be  exacted  from  the  candidates,  but  a  profession  conform- 
able to  the  Articles  of  the  English -Church,  omitting  the 
oath  called  test,  which  prevents  their  being  ordained  by 
the  English  bishops. 


FECRETARY'S  OFFICE,  6rH  APRIL,  1785. 

SIR, 

Copies  of  the  enclosed  letters  from  Mr.  John  Adams  and 
Mr.  de  St.  Saphorin,  upon  the  subject  of  conferring  holy 


APPENDIX. 


329 


Orders  agreeably  to  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, were  this  day  received  by  council;  who  have  been 
pleased  to  direct  that  they  should  be  communicated  to 
you. 

I  must  beg  that  they  be  returned  to  this  office,  as  soon 
as  you  may  find  it  convenient,  and  am, 

Sir,  with  the  greatest  respect, 
Your  most  obedient, 
Humble  servant, 
(Signed,)  J.  ARMSTRONG,  Jur. 

Rev.  Dr.  Wm.  White. 


Answer. 

SIR, 

I  request  you  to  present  to  the  honorable  council,  my 
grateful  sentiments  of  their  polite  attention  to  the  interests 
of  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  your  communication  of  this 
morning. 

Their  condescension  will  be  an  apology  for  my  troubling 
them  with  the  perusal  of  an  act  of  the  British  parliament, 
having  the  same  operation  with  the  liberal  and  brotherly 
proceeding  of  the  Danish  government  and  clergy.  And 
the  liberty  I  have  taken  may  hereafter  exempt  some  of  my 
brethren  from  the  suspicion  of  having  entered  into  obliga- 
tions inconsistent  with  their  duty  to  their  country. 

But,  sir,  it  would  be  injustice  to  the  Episcopal  Church, 
were  I  to  neglect  to  inform  the  honorable  board,  that  I 
take  it  to  be  a  general  sentiment,  not  to  depend  on  any 
foreign  authority  for  the  ordination  of  ministers,  or  for  any 
other  matter  appertaining  to  religion.  As  the  light  in  which 
we  shall  hereafter  be  viewed  by  our  fellow-citizens  must  de- 
pend on  an  adherence  to  the  above  mentioned  principle,  I 
take  the  liberty  to  submit  to  the  honorable  council  two 
printed  accounts  of  proceedings  held  in  this  city  and  in 
New  York. 


330  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

With  my  most  dutiful  thanks  to  the  honorable  board, 
and  with  all  due  submission,  I  am,  sir, 

Their  and  your  very  humble  servant, 

WM.  WHITE. 

April,  kth,  1785. 
y.  Armstrong.  Esq. 


No.  2.     Page  85. 

Communication  of  the  Clergy  of  Connecticut,  to  the  Arch- 
bis  hop  of  York. 

NEW  YORK,  APRIL  21,  1783. 

MY  LORD, 

The  clergy  of  Connecticut,  deeply  impressed  with  anx- 
ious apprehension  of  what  may  be  the  fate  of  the  Church  in 
America,  under  the  present  changes  of  empire  and  policy, 
beg  leave  to  embrace  the  earliest  moment  in  their  power  to 
address  your  Grace  on  that  important  subject. 

This  part  of  America  is  at  length  dismembered  from  the 
British  empire;  but,  notwithstanding  the  dissolution  of  our 
civil  connection  with  the  parent  state,  we  still  hope  to  re- 
tain the  religious  polity;  the  primitive  and  evangelical  doc- 
trine and  discipline,  which,  at  the  reformation,  were  restored 
and  established  in  the  Church  of  England.  To  render  that 
polity  complete,  and  to  provide  for  its  perpetuity  in  this 
country,  by  the  establishment  of  an  American  Episcopate, 
has  long  been  an  object  of  anxious  concern  to  us,  and  to 
many  of  our  brethren  in  other  parts  of  this  continent.  The 
attainment  of  this  object  appears  to  have  been  hitherto  ob- 
structed by  considerations  of  a  political  nature,  which  we 
conceive  were  founded  in  groundless  jealousies  and  misap- 
prehensions  that  can  no  longer  be  supposed  to  exist:  and 
therefore,  whatever  may  be  the  effect  of  independency  on 
this  country,  in  other  respects,  we  presume  it  will  be  al- 
lowed to  open  a  door  for  renewing  an  application  to  the 
spiritual  governors  of  the  Church  on  this  head;  an  applica- 
tion which  we  consider  as  not  only  seasonable,  but  more 


APPENDIX.  331 

than  ever  necessary  at  this  time;  because,  if  it  be  now  any 
longer  neglected,  there  is  reason  to  apprehend  that  a  plan 
of  a  very  extraordinary  nature,  lately  formed  and  published 
in_Philadelphia,  may  be  carried  into  execution.     This  plan  / 
is,  in  brief,  to  constitute  a  nominal  Episcopate  by  the  united  \ 
suffrages  of  presbyters  and  laymen.     The  peculiar  situation 
of  the  Episcopal  Churches  in  America,  and  the  necessity  of 
adopting  some  speedy  remedy  for  the  want  of  a  regular 
Episcopate,  are  offered,  in  the  publication  here  alluded  to, 
as  reasons  fully  sufficient  to  justify  the  scheme.     Whatever 
influence  this  project  may  have  on  the  minds  of  the  igno- 
rant or  unprincipled  part  of  the  laity,  or  however  it  may, 
possibly,  be  countenanced  by  some  of  the  clergy  in  other 
parts  of  the  country,  we  think  it  our  duty  to  reject  such  a  / 
spurious  substitute  for  Episcopacy,  and,  as  far  as  may  be  in  j 
our  power,  to  prevent  its  taking  effect. 

To  lay  the  foundation,  therefore,  for  a  valid  and  regular 
Episcopate  in  America,  we  earnestly  entreat  your  Grace, 
that,  in  your  archi-episcopal  character,  you  will  espouse  the 
cause  of  our  sinking  Church,  and,  at  this  important  crisis, 
afford  her  that  relief  on  which  her  very  existence  depends, 
by  consecrating  a  bishop  for  Connecticut.  The  person 
whom  we  have  prevailed  upon  to  offer  himself  to  your  Grace, 
for  that  purpose,  is  the  Reverend  Doctor  Samuel  Seabury, 
who  has  been  the  society's  worthy  missionary  for  many 
years.  He  was  born  and  educated  in  Connecticut — he  is 
personally  known  to  us — and  we  believe  him  to  be  every 
way  qualified  for  the  Episcopal  office,  and  for  the  discharge 
of  those  duties  peculiar  to  it,  in  the  present  trying  and  dan- 
gerous times. 

All  the  weighty  considerations  which  concur  to  enforce 
our  request,  are  well  known  to  your  Grace;  we  therefore 
forbear  to  enlarge,  lest  we  should  seem  to  distrust  your 
Grace's  zeal  in  a  cause  of  such  acknowledged  importance  to 
the  interests  of  religion.  Suffer  us  then  to  rest  in  humble 
confidence  that  your  Grace  will  hear  and  grant  our  petition, 
and  give  us  the  consolation  of  receiving,  through  a  clear 


3J2  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

and  uninterrupted  channel,  an  overseer  in  this  part  of  the 
household  of  God. 

That  God  may  continue  your  life  and  health,  make  you 
in  His  providence  an  eminent  instrument  of  great  and  ex- 
tensive usefulness  to  mankind  in  general,  a  lasting  blessing 
to  the  Church  over  which  you  preside  in  particular;  and 
that  the  present  and  future  sons  of  the  Church  in  America, 
may  have  cause  to  record  and  perpetuate  your  name  as 
their  friend  and  spiritual  father, — and,  when  your  sacred 
work  is  ended,  that  you  may  find  it  gloriously  rewarded,  is 
and  shall  be  the  devout  prayer  of  the  clergy  of  Connecticut, 
by  whose  order  (in  convention  assembled),  and  in  whose  be- 
half, this  letter  is  addressed  to  your  Grace,  by  your  Grace's 
most  obedient,  humble  servant, 

(Signed),  ABRAHAM  JARVIS, 

Minister  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Midtilttmutt, 
and  Secretary  to  the  Convention. 


Testimonial. 

Whereas  our  well  beloved  in  Christ,  Samuel  Seabury, 
Doctor  of  Divinity,  and  missionary  of  Staten  Island,  in  this 
province,  is  about  to  embark  for  England,  at  the  earnest 
request  of  the  Episcopal  clergy  of  Connecticut,  and  for  the 
purpose  of  presenting  himself  a  candidate  for  the  sacred 
office  of  a  bishop;  and  that  when  consecrated  and  admitted 
to  the  said  office,  he  may  return  to  Connecticut,  and  there 
exercise  the  spiritual  powers,  and  discharge  the  duties 
which  are  peculiar  to  the  Episcopal  character,  among  the 
members  of  the  Church  of  England,  by  superintending  the 
clergy,  ordaining  candidates  for  holy  Orders,  and  confirming 
such  of  the  laity  as  may  choose  to  be  confirmed — We,  the 
subscribers,  desirous  to  testify  our  hearty  concurrence  in 
this  measure,  and  promote  its  success,  as  well  as  to  declare 
the  high  opinion  we  justly  entertain  of  Doctor  Seabury's 
learning,  abilities,  prudence,  and  zeal  for  religion,  do  here- 
by certify,  that  we  have  been  personally  and  intimately  ac- 


APPENDIX.  333 

quainted  with  the  said  Doctor  Seabury  for  many  years 
past — that  we  believe  him  to  be  every  way  qualified  for  the 
sacred  office  of  a  bishop;  the  several  duties  of  which  office, 
we  are  firmly  persuaded,  he  will  discharge  with  honor, 
dignity,  and  fidelity,  and  consequently  with  advantage  to 
the  Church  of  God. 

And  we  can  not  forbear  to  express  our  most  earnest 
wish,  that  Doctor  Seabury  may  succeed  in  this  application, 
as  it  will  be  the  means  of  preserving  the  Church  of  England 
in  America  from  ruin,  and  of  preventing  many  irregularities 
which  we  see  approaching,  and  which,  if  once  introduced, 
no  after  care  may  be  able  to  remove. 
Given  under  our  hands,  at  New  York,  this  twenty-first  day  of 

April,  in  the  year  of  our  Lor  done  thousand  seven  hundred 

and  eighty-three. 

JEREMIAH    LEAMING,    D.D. 
CHARLES    INGLIS,   D.D. 

Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  New  York. 

BENJAMIN    MOORE,    D.D. 

Assistant  Minister  of  Trinity  Church, 
New  York,  and  others. 


Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  York. 

NEW  YORK,  MAY  24,  1783. 

MY  LORD, 

The  Reverend  Doctor  Samuel  Seabury  will  have  the 
honor  of  presenting  this  letter  to  your  Grace.  He  goes 
to  England  at  the  request  of  the  Episcopal  clergy  of  Con- 
necticut, on  business  highly  interesting  and  important. 
They  have  written  on  the  subject  to  your  Grace,  and 
also  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  the  Bishop  of 
London.  But,  as  they  were  pleased  to  consult  us  on  the 
occasion,  and  to  submit  what  they  had  written  to  our  in- 
spection, requesting  our  concurrence  in  their  application, 
their  letters  are  dated  at  New  York,  and  -signed  only  by 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Jarvis,  the  secretary  to  their  convention, 
whom  they  commissioned  and  sent  here  for  that  purpose. 


334  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH, 

The  measure  proposed,  on  this  occasion,  by  our  brethren 
of  Connecticut,  could  not  fail  to  have  our  hearty  concur- 
rence. For  we  are  decidedly  of  opinion,  that  no  other 
means  can  be  devised  to  preserve  the  existence  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  in  this  country.  We  have  therefore 
joined  with  Mr.  Jarvis  in  giving  Doctor  Seabury  a  testi- 
monial, in  which  we  have  briefly,  but  sincerely,  expressed 
our  sense  of  his  merit,  and  our  earnest  wishes  for  the  suc- 
cess of  his  undertaking. 

Should  he  succeed  and  be  consecrated,  he  means  (with 
the  approbation  of  the  society),  to  return  in  the  character, 
and  perform  the  duties  of  a  missionary  at  New  London,  in 
Connecticut;  and  on  his  arrival  in  that  country,  to  make 
application  to  the  Governor,  in  hope  of  being  cheerfully 
permitted  to  exercise  the  spiritual  powers  of  his  Episcopal 
office  there;  in  which,  we  are  persuaded,  he  will  meet  with 
little  if  any  opposition.  For  many  persons  of  character  in 
Connecticut,  and  elsewhere,  who  are  members  of  the  Epis- 
1  copal  Church,  have  lately  declared  they  have  no  longer 
'  any  objection  to  an  American  Episcopate,  now  that  the 
independence  of  this  country,  acknowledged  by  Great 
Britain,  has  removed  their  apprehensions  of  the-  bishops 
being  invested  with  a  share  of  temporal  power  by  the 
British  government.  We  flatter  ourselves  that  any  imped- 
iments to  the  consecration  of  a  bishop  for  America,  arising 
from  the  peculiar  constitution  of  the  Church  of  England, 
may  be  removed  by  the  King's  royal  permission  and  we  can 
not  entertain  a  doubt  of  his  Majesty's  readiness  to  grant  it. 
In  humble  confidence  that  your  Grace  will  consider  the 
object  of  this  application  as  a  measure  worthy  of  your 
/  zealous  patronage,  we  beg  leave  to  remind  your  Grace,  that 
several  legacies  have  been,  at  different  times,  bequeathed 
for  the  support  of  bishops  in  America,  and  to  express  our 
hopes  that  some  part  of  those  legacies,  or  of  the  interest 
arising  from  them,  may  be  appropriated  to  the  mainten- 
ance of  Doctor  Seabury,  in  case  he  is  consecrated,  and 
settles  in  America.  We  conceive  that  the  separation  of 


APPENDIX.  335 

this  country  from  the  parent  state  can  be  no  reasonable 
bar  to  such  appropriation,  nor  invalidate  the  title  of  Amer- 
ican bishops,  who  derive  their  consecration  from  the  Church 
of  England,  to  the  benefit  of  those  legacies.  And  perhaps 
this  charitable  assistance  is  now  more  necessary,  than  it 
would  have  been,  had  not  the  empire  been  dismembered. 

We  take  this  opportunity  to  inform  your  Grace,  that  we 
have  consulted  his  Excellency  Sir  Guy  Carleton,  on  the 
subject  of  procuring  the  appointment  of  a  bishop  for  the 
province  of  Nova  Scotia,  on  which  he  has  expressed  to  us 
his  entire  approbation,  and  has  written  to  administration, 
warmly  recommending  the  measure.  We  took  the  liberty, 
at  the  same  time,  of  mentioning  our  worthy  brother,  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  B.  Chandler,  to  his  Excellency,  as  a  per- 
son every  way  qualified  to  discharge  the  duties  of  the  Epis- 
copal office  in  that  province,  with  dignity  and  honor.  And 
we  hope  for  your  Grace's  approbation  of  what  we  have  done 
in  that  matter,  and  for  the  concurrence  of  your  influence  with 
Sir  Guy  Carleton's  recommendation  in  promoting  the  design. 

We  should  have  given  this  information  sooner  to  your 
Grace,  but  that  we  waited  for  Doctor  Seabury's  departure 
for  England,  which  we  considered  as  affording  the  best 
and  most  proper  conveyance. 

If  Doctor  Chandler  and  Doctor  Seabury  should  both 
succeed,  as  we  pray  God  they  may,  we  trust  that,  with  the 
blessing  of  heaven,  the  Episcopal  Church  will  yet  flourish 
in  this  Western  hemisphere. 

With  the  warmest  sentiments  of  respect  and  esteem,  we 
have  the  honor  to  be,  My  lord, 

Your  Grace's  most  dutiful  sons, 

And  obedient,  humble  servants, 

JEREMIAH    LEAMING,   D.D. 
CHARLES    INGLIS,   D.D. 

Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  New  York. 

BENJAMIN    MOORE,   D.D. 

Assistant  Minister  of  Trinity  Church, 

New  York,  and  others. 
His  Grace  t^e  Archbishop  of  York. 


336  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

No.  3.     Page  102. 

A  Letter  from  the  Rev.  Abraham  Jarvis,  in  the  Name  of the 
Clergy  of  Connecticut* 

REVEREND  SIR, 

We,  the  clergy  of  Connecticut  met  at  Woodbury  in  vol- 
untary convention,  beg  leave  to  acquaint  you,  that  a  small 
pamphlet,  printed  in  Philadelphia,  has  been  transmitted  to 
us,  of  which  you  are  said  to  be  the  author.  This  pamphlet 
proposes  a  new  form  of  government  in  the  Episcopal 
Church,  and  points  at  the  method  of  erecting  it.  As  the 
thirteen  states  have  now  risen  to  independent  sovereignty, 
we  agree  with  you,  sir,  that  the  chain  which  connected  this 
with  the  mother  Church  is  broken;  that  the  American 
Church  is  now  left  to  stand  in  its  own  strength — and  that 
some  change  in  its  regulations  must  in  due  time  take  place. 
But  we  think  it  premature  and  of  dangerous  consequence, 
to  enter  upon  so  capital  a  business,  till  we  have  resident 
bishops  (if  they  can  be  obtained)  to  assist  in  the  perform-< 
ance  of  it,  and  to  form  a  new  union  in  the  American 
Church,  under  proper  superiors,  since  its  union  is  now' 
broken  with  such  superiors  in  the  British  Church.  We 
shall  only  advert  to  such  things  in  the  pamphlet,  as  we  es- 
teem of  dangerous  consequence.  You  say  the  conduct  you 
mean  to  recommend,  is  to  include  in  the  proposed  frame 
of  government  a  general  approbation  of  Episcopacy,  and 
a  declaration  of  an  intention  to  procure  the  succession  as 
soon  as  conveniently  may  be;  but  in  the  mean  time  to 
carry  the  plan  into  effect,  without  waiting  for  the  succes- 
sion. But  why  do  you  include  a  general  approbation  of 
Episcopacy,  in  your  proposed  new  frame  of  government  ? 
/Not  because  you  think  bishops  a  constituent  part  of  an 
Episcopal  Church,  unless  you  conceive  they  derive  their 
office  and  existence  from  the  King's  authority;  for  though 

•  See  ante,  p.    99.    Ed. 


APPENDIX.  337 

you  acknowledge  we  can  not  at  present  have  bishops  here, 
and  propose  to  set  up  without  them,  yet  you  say  no  consti- 
tutioflal  principle  of  our  Church  is  changed  by  the  revolu-  s 
tion,  but  what  was  founded  on  the  authority  of  the  King.  ^ 
Your  motives  for  the  above  general  approbation,  seem 
indeed  to  be  purely  political.  One  is,  that  the  general 
opinion  of  Episcopalians  is  in  favor  of  bishops,  and  there- 
fore (if  we  understand  your  reasoning)  it  would  be  im- 
politic not  to  flatter  them  with  the  hopes  of  it.  Another 
reason  is,  that  too  wide  a  deviation  from  the  British  Church 
might  induce  future  emigrants  from  thence  to  set  up  in- 
dependent churches  here.  But  could  you  have  proposed 
to  set  up  the  ministry,  without  waiting  for  the  succession, 
had  you  believed  the  Episcopal  superiority  to  be  an_ordi- 
nance  of  Christ,  with  the  exclusive  authority  of  ordination 
and  government,  and  that  it  has  ever  been  so  esteemed  in 
the  purest  ages  of  the  Church  ?  and  yet  we  conceive  this  to 
be  the  sense  of  Episcopalians  in  general,  and  warranted  by 
the  constant  practice  of  the  Christian  Church.  Really,  sir, 
we  think  an  Episcopal  Church  without  Episcopacy,  if  it  be 
not  a  contradiction  in  terms,  would,  however,  be  a  new 
thing  under  the  sun;  and  yet  the  Episcopal  Church,  by  the 
pamphlet  proposed  to  be  erected,  must  be  in  this  predica- 
ment till  the  succession  be  obtained.  You  plead  necessity, 
however,  and  argue  that  the  best  writers  in  the  Church, 
admit  of  Presbyterian  ordination,  where  Episcopal  can  not 
be  had.  To  prove  this,  you  quote  concessions  from  the  »= 
venerable  Hooker,  and  Dr.  Chandler,  which  their  exube-V 
rant  charity  to  the  reformed  churches  abroad,  led  them  to  V 
make.  But  the  very  words  you  quote  from  the  last  men- 
tioned  gentleman  prove  his  opinion  to  be,  that  bishops 
were  as  truly  an  ordinance  of  Christ,  and  as  essential  to  His 
Church  as  the  sacraments;  for,  say  you,  he  insists  upon  it 
(meaning  the  Episcopal  superiority)  as  of  divine  right,  as- 
serts that  the  laws  relating  to  it  bind  as  strongly  as  the 
laws  which  relate  to  baptism  and  the  holy  eucharist,  and 
that  if  the  succession  be  once  broken,  not  all  the  men  on 


333  MEMOIRS  OF   THE    CHURCH. 

earth,  not  all  the  angels  in  heaven,  without  an  immediate 
commission  from  Christ,  can  restore  it — but  you  say,  he 
does  not,  however,  hold  this  succession  to  be  necessary, 
only  where  it  can  be  had.  Neither  does  he  or  the  Chris-  I 
tian  Church  hold  the  sacraments  to  be  necessary,  wjiere  j 
they  can  not  be  had  agreeable  to  the  appointment  of  theif 
(jreat  Head  of  the  Church.  Why  should  particular  acts  J 
of  authority  be  thought  more  necessary  than  the  authority 
itself  ?  Why  should  the  sacraments  be  more  essential  than 
that  authority  Christ  has  ordained  to  administer  them  ? 
It  is  truethat  Christ  has  appointed  the  sacraments,  and 
it  is  as  true  that  He  hath  appointed  officers  to  administer 
them,  and  has  expressly  forbid  any  to  do  it  but  those  who 
are  authorized  by  His  appointment,  or  called  of  God  as  was 
Aaron.  And  yet  these  gentlemen  (without  any  inconsis- 
tency with  their  declared  sentiments)  have,  and  all  good 
men  will  express  their  charitable  hopes,  that  God,  in  com- 
passion to  a  well  meant  zeal,  will  add  the  same  blessings 
to  those  who,  through  unavoidable  mistake,  act  beside  His 
commission  as  if  they  really  had  it.  As  far  as  we  can  find, 
it  has  been  the  constant  opinion  of  our  Church  in  England 
and  here,  that  the  Episcopal  superiority  is  an  ordinance  of 
Christ,  and  we  think  that  the  uniform  practice  of  the  whole 
American  Church,  for  near  a  century,  sending  their  candi- 
dates three  thousand  miles  for  holy  Orders,  is  more  than  a 
presumptive  proof  that  the  Church  here  are,  and  ever  have 
been,  of  this  opinion.  The  sectaries,  soon  after  the  refor- 
mation, declared  that  the  book  of  consecration,  etc.,  was 
superstitious  and  contrary  to  God's  Word,  and  the  modera- 
tion you  mention  in  the  articles  and  canons,  consists  in 
affirming  that  this  declaration  was  entirely  false;  and  would 
you  wish  to  be  more  severe  ?  The  instances  you  adduce, 
wherein  Presbyterian  ordination  has  been  tolerated  in  the 
Church,  have,  by  its  best  writers,  been  set  in  such  a  point 
of  view  as  to  give  no  countenance  to  your  scheme,  and  the 
authorities  you  quote  have  been  answered  again  and  again. 
If  you  will  not  allow  this  superiority  to  have  an  higher  ori- 


APPENDIX.  339 


pired,  \ 

war- 

t  »•  y~v  *-*-» 


gin  than  the  apostles;  yet  since  they  were  divinely  inspired, 
we  see  not  why  their  practice  is  not  equal  to  a  divine 
rant ;  and  as  they  have  given  no  liberty  to  deviate  from 
their  practice  in  any  exigence  of  the  Church,  we  know  not 
what  authority  we  have  to  take  such  liberties  in  any  case. 
However,  we  think  nothing  can  be  more  clear,  than  that 
our  Church  has  ever  believed  bishops  to  have  the  sole  right 
of  ordination  and  government,  and  that  this  regimen  was 
appointed  of  Christ  Himself,  and  it  is  now,  to  use  your  own 
words,  humbly  submitted  to  consideration,  whether  such 
Episcopalians  as  consent  even  to  a  temporary  departure, 
and  set_aside  this  ordinance  of  Christ  for  conveniency,  can 
scarcely  deserve  the  name  of  Christians.  But  would  neces- 
sity warrant  a  deviation  from  the  law  of  Christ,  and  the 
immemorial  practice  of  the  Church,  yet  what  necessity  have 
we  to  plead  ?  Can  we  plead  necessity  with  any  propriety, 
till  we  have  tried  to  obtain  an  Episcopate,  and  have  been 
rejected  ?  We  conceive  the  present  to  be  a  more  favorable 
opportunity  for  the  introduction  of  bishops,  than  this  coun- 
try has  before  seen.  However  dangerous  bishops  formerly 
might  have  been  thought  to  the  civil  rights  of  these  states, 
this  danger  has  now  vanished,  for  such  superiors  will  have 
no  civil  authority.  They  will  be  purely  ecclesiastics.  The 
states  have  now  risen  to  sovereign  authority,  and  bishops 
will  be  equally  under  the  control  of  civil  law  with  other 
clergymen;  no  danger,  then,  can  now  be  feared  from  bish- 
ops, but  such  as  may  be  feared  from  presbyters.  This 
being  the  case,  have  we  not  the  highest  reason  to  hope, 
that  the  whole  civil  authority  upon  the  continent  (should 
their  assistance  be  needed)  will  unite  their  influence  with 
the  Church,  to  procure  an  office  so  essential  to  it,  and  to 
render  complete  a  profession,  which  contains  so  consider- 
able a  proportion  of  its  inhabitants.  And  on  the  other 
hand,  is  there  any  reason  to  believe,  that  all  the  bishops  in 
England,  and  in  all  the  other  reformed  Churches  in  Europe, 
are  so  totally  lost  to  a  sense  of  their  duty,  and  to  the  real 
wants  of  their  brethren  in  the  Episcopal  Church  here,  as 


340  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

to  refuse  to  ordain  bishops  to  preside  over  us,  when  a 
proper  application  shall  be  made  to  them  for  it  ?  If  this 
can  not  be,  why  is  not  the  present  a  favorable  opportunity 
for  such  an  application  ?  Nothing  is  further  from  the  design 
of  this  letter  than  to  begin  a  dispute  with  you;  but  in  a 
frank  and  brotherly  way  to  express  our  opinion  of  the 
mistaken  and  dangerous  tendency  of  the  pamphlet.  We 
fear,  should  the  scheme  of  it  be  carried  into  execution  in 
the  southern  states,  it  will  create  divisions  in  the  Church  at 
a  time  when  its  whole  strength  depends  upon  its  unity: 
for  we  know  it  is  totally  abhorrent  from  the  principles  of 
the  Church  in  the  northern  states,  and  are  fully  convinced 
they  will  never  submit  to  it.  And  indeed  should  we  con- 
sent to  a  temporary  departure  from  Episcopacy,  there  would 
be  very  little  propriety  in  asking  for  it  afterwards,  and  as 
little  reason  ever  to  expect  it  in  America.  Let  us  all  then 
unite  as  one  man  to  improve  this  favorable  opportunity,  to 
procure  an  object  so  desirable  and  so  essential  to  the 
Church. 

We  are,  dear  sir,  your  affectionate  brethren,  the  clergy 
of  Connecticut. 

Signed  by  order  of  the  convention, 

ABRAHAM   JARVIS,    Sec'ry. 

Rev.  Mr.   White. 
Woodbury,  blarcli  25,  1783. 


No.  4.     Page  113. 

A   Letter  of  tJie   Right  Rev.  Bishop  Seabury,  to  the  Rev. 

Dr.   Smith. 

AUGUST  15,  1785. 
REV.    AND    DEAR    SlR, 

It  has  not  been  in  my  power  till  this  day,  to  pay  that  at- 
tention to  your  letter  of  July  19,  which  the  importance  of 
its  several  subjects  demanded.  The  grand  difficulty  that 
defeated  my  application  for  consecration  7n  England,  ap- 
peared to  me  to  be  the  want  of  an  application  from  the 


APPENDIX.  341 

State  of  Connecticut.     Other  objections  are  made,  viz.,  that  I 
tHere  was  no  precise  diocese  marked  out  by  the  civil  author-    • 
ity,  nor  a  stated  revenue  appointed  for  the  bishop's  sup-  r 
port;  but  these  were  removed.     The   other  remained,  for/ 
the    civil    authority    in    Connecticut    is    Presbyterian,    and 
therefore  could  not  be  supposed  would  petition  for  a  bish- 
op; and  had  this  been  removed,  I  am  not  sure  that  another 
would  not  have  started  up:  for  this  happened  several  times. 
I  waited  and  procured  a  copy  of  an,  act  of  the  legislature  of 
Connecticut,  which  puts  all  denominations  of  Christians  on 
a  footing  of  equality,  except  the  Roman  Catholics,  and  to 
them  it  gives  a  free  toleration,  certified  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  state;  for  to  Connecticut  all  my  negotiations  were  con- 
fined.    The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  wished  it  had  been 
fuller,  but  thought  it  afforded  ground  on  which  to  proceed; 
yet  he  afterwards  said  it  would  not  do;  and  that  the  minis-  f 
ter,  without  a  formal  requisition  from  the,  state,  would  not  I 
suffer  the  bill,  enabling  the  Bishop  of  tendon  to  ordain  1 
foreign  candidates  without  their  taking  the  oaths,  to  "pass 
the    Commons,   if  it  contained  a  clause   for   consecrating 
American  bishops.     And  as  his  Grace  did  not  choose  to 
proceed  without  parliamentary  authority,  though  if  I  under- 
stood him  right,  a  majority  of  the  judges  and  crown  law- 
yers, were  of  opinion  he  might  safely  do  it.     I  turned  my 
attention  to  the  remains  of  the  old  Scots  Episcopal  Church, 
whose  consecration  I  knew  was  derived  from  England,  and 
their  authority,  in  an  ecclesiastical  sense,  fully  equal  to  the 
English  bishops.     No  objection  was  ever  made  to  me  on 
account  of  the  legacies  left  for  American  bishops;  some 
persons  had  surmises  of  this  kind,  but  I  know  not  whence 
they  arose.* 

I  can  see  no  good  ground  of  apprehension  concerning 
the  titles  of  estates,  or  emoluments  belonging  to  the 
Church  in  your  state;  your  Church  is  still  the  Church  of 

*  While  in  England,  and  before  he  had  obtained  consecration,  Seabury  wrote 
to  a  gentleman  in  New  York,  saying,  "I  have  been  amused,  I  think  deceived. "- 
Journals,   III,  216.     Ed. 


342  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH, 

England,  subsisting  under  a  different  civil  government. 
We  have  in  America  the  Church  of  Holland,  of  Scotland, 
of  Sweden,  of  Moravia,  and  why  not  of  England  ?  Our 
being  the  Church  of  England,  no  more  implies  dependence 
on  or  subjection  to  England,  than  being  of  the  Church  of 
Holland  implies  subjection  to  Holland.  The  plea  of  the 
Methodists  is  something  like  impudence.  Mr.  Wesley  is 
only  a  presbyter,  and  all  his  ordinations  Presbyterian,  and 
in  direct  opposition  to  the  Church  of  England.  And  they 
can  have  no  pretence  for  calling  themselves  Churchmen, 
till  they  return  to  the  unity  of  the  Church,  which  they  have 
unreasonably,  unnecessarily,  and  wickedly  broken,  by  their 
separation  and  schism. 

Your  two  cautions,  respecting  recommendations  and 
titles,  are  certainly  just.  Till  you  are  so  happy  as  to  have 
a  bishop  of  your  own,  it  will  be  a  pleasure  to  me  to  do  any 
thing  I  can  for  the  supply  of  your  churches.  And  I  am  con- 
fident the  clergy  of  Maryland  and  the  other  states,  will  be 
very  particular  with  regard  to  the  qualifications  and  titles  of 
persons  to  be  admitted  into  their  own  order.  Should  they 
think  proper  to  send  any  candidates  hither,  I  would  wish 
that  it  might  be  at  the  stated  times  of  ordination;  because 
the  clergy  here  being  so  scattered,  it  is  not  easy,  on  every 
emergency,  to  get  three  of  them  together;  and  never  with- 
out some  expense,  which  they  can  not  well  afford.  I  can 
not  omit  to  mention  again  the  particular  satisfaction  Mr. 
Ferguson  gave,  not  only  to  me,  but  to  all  our  clergy.  I 
hope  he  will  prove  a  worthy  and  useful  clergyman.  I  flat- 
ter myself  he  got  home  without  any  disagreeable  accident. 
'\jr  I  I  thank  you  for  your  communication  respecting  Wash- 

;(  ingtan  College,  and  the  various  conventions  you  have  had 
in  your  state  and  neighborhood.  The  clergy  and  laity 
have  particular  merit  in  making  so  great  exertions,  to  get 
our  Church  into  a  settled  and  respectable  state.  But  on 
subjects  of  such  magnitude  and  variety,  it  is  to  be  ex- 
pected that  sentiments  will  differ.  All  men  do  not  always 
see  the  same  object  in  the  same  light;  and  persons  at  a 


APPENDIX.  343 

distance  are  not  always  masters  of  the  precise  reasons  and 
circumstances,  which  have  occasioned  particular  modes  of 
acting.  Of  some  things  therefore  in  your  proceedings  I 
can  not  be  a  competent  judge,  without  minute  information; 
and  I  am  very  sorry  that  my  present  circumstances  and 
duty  here,  will  not  permit  me  to  make  so  long  a  journey 
at  this  time;  because  by  personal  interview  and  conversa- 
tion only,  can  such  information  be  had. 

But,  my  dear  sir,  there  are  some  things  which,  if  I  do 
not  much  misapprehend,  are  really  wrong.  In  giving  my 
opinion  of  them,  I  must  claim  the  same  privilege  of  judg- 
ing for  myself  which  others  claim,  and  also  that  right  of 
fair  and  candid  interpretation  of  my  sentiments  which  is 
due  to  all  men. 

1.  I  think  you  have  done  wrong  in  establishing  so  many 
and   so   precise   fundamental  rules.     You  seem  hereby  to 
have  precluded  yourselves  from  the  benefit  of  after  con- 
sideration.    And  by  having  the  power  of  altering  funda- 
mental laws  diffused  through  so  large  a  body,  it  appears  to 
me  next  to  impossible  to  have  them  altered,  even  in  some 
reasonable  cases;  because  cases  really  reasonable  may  not 
appear  so  to  two  thirds  of  so  large  an  assembly.     It  should 
also  be  remembered,  that  while  human  nature  is  as  it  is, 
something  of  party  passion  or  partiality  will  ever  be  apt, 
in  some  degree,  to  influence  the  views  and  debates  of  a 
numerous  and  mixed  assembly. 

2.  I  think  you  have  too  much  circumscribed  the  power 
of  your  bishops.     That  the  duty  and  office  of  a  bisJiop  differs 
in  nothing  from  that  of  other  priests,  except  in  the  power  of 
ordination  and  confirmation,  (Pamphlet,  p.  16,)  is  a  position 
that  carries  Jerome's  opinion  to  the  highest  pitch.     Quid  , 
facit  Episcopus  quod  presbyter  non  faciat,  excepta  ordina-  , 
tione  f     But  it  does  not  appear  that  Jerome  had  the  sup- 
port of  the  Church  in  this  opinion,  but  rather  the  contrary. 
Government^  as  essentially  pertains  to  bishops  as  ordina- 
tion; nay,  ordination  is  but  the  particular  exercise  of  gov- 
ernment.    Whatever  share  of  government  presbyters  have 


344  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

in  the  Church,  they  have  from  the  bishop,  and  must  ex- 
ercise it  in  conjunction  with  or  in  subordination  to  him. 
And  though  a  congregation  may  have  a  right,  and  I  am 
willing  to  allow  it,  to  choose  their  minister,  as  they  are  to 
support  him  and  live  under  his  ministry,  yet  the  bishop's 
concurrence  or  license  is  necessary,  because  they  are  part 
of  his  charge;  has  the  care  of  their  souls;  and  therefore  the 
minister's  authority  to  take  charge  of  that  congregation 
must  come  through  the  bishop. 

The  choice  of  the  bishop  is  in  the  presbyters;  but  the 
neighboring  bishops,  who  are  to  consecrate  him,  must  have 
the  right  of  judging  whether  he  be  a  proper  person  or  not. 
The  presbyters  are  the  bishop's  council,  with  whom  he 
ought  to  do  nothing  but  matters  of  course.  The  presbyters 
have  always  a  check  upon  their  bishop;  because  they  can, 
neither  bishop  nor  presbyters,  do  any  thing  beyond  the 
common  course  of  duty,  without  each  other.  I  mean  with 
regard  to  a  particular  diocese;  for  it  does  not  appear  that 
presbyters  had  any  seat  in  general  councils,  but  by  partic- 
ular indulgence. 

The  people,  being  the  patrons  of  the  churches  in  this 
country,  and  having  the  means  of  the  bishop's  and  minis- 
ter's support  in  their  hands,  have  a  sufficient  restraint  upon 
them.  In  cases  that  require  it,  they  can  apply  to  their 
bishop,  who,  with  the  assistance  of  his  presbyters,  will  pro- 
ceed, as  the  case  may  require,  to  censure,  suspension,  or 
deposition  of  the  offending  clergyman.  If  a  bishop  behaves 
amiss,  the  neighboring  bishops  are  his  judges.  Men  that 
are  not  to  be  trusted  with  these  powers  are  not  fit  to  be 
bishops  or  presbyters  at  all. 

This,  I  take  it,  is  the  constitution  of  the  Christian  Church, 
in  its  pure  and  simple  state.  And  it  is  a  constitution  which, 
if  adhered  to,  will  carry  itself  into  good  effect.  This  con- 
stitution we  have  adopted  in  Connecticut;  and  we  do  hope 
and  trust  that  we  shall,  by  God's  grace,  exhibit  to  the 
world,  in  our  government,  discipline,  and  order,  a  pure  and 
perfect  model  of  primitive  simplicity. 


APPENDIX.  34  5 

* 

Presbyters  can  not  be  too  careful  in  choosing  their  bish- 
op; nor  the  people  in  choosing  their  minister.  Improper 
men  may,  however,  sometimes  succeed;  and  so  they  will, 
make  exact  rules  as  you  can,  and  circumscribe  their  power 
as  you  can.  And  an  improper  man  in  the  Church  is  an  im- 
proper man,  however  he  came  there,  and  however  his  power 
be  limited.  The  more  you  circumscribe  him,  the  greater 
temptation  he  is  under  to  form  a  party  to  support  him;  and 
when  his  party  is  formed,  all  the  power  of  your  convention 
will  not  be  able  to  displace  him.  In  short,  if  you  get  a  bad 
man,  your  laws  and  regulations  will  not  be  effectual;  if  a 
good  man,  the  general  laws  of  the  Church  are  sufficient.  . 

Where  civil  states  have  made  provision  for  ministers,  it 
seems  reasonable  that  they  should  define  the  qualifications, 
and  regulate  the  conduct  of  those  who  are  to  enjoy  the 
emoluments.  But  voluntary  associations  for  the  exercise  of 
such  powers  as  your  convention  is  to  have,  are  always  apt, 
such  is  the  infirmity  of  human  nature,  to  fall  into  parties; 
and  when  party  enters,  animosity  and  discord  soon  follow. 
From  what  has  been  said,  you  will  suppose  I  shall  object. 

3.  To  the  admission  of  lay  members  into  synods,  etc.  ^  V  &t  « 
I  have  as  great  a  regard  for  the  laity  as  any  man  can  have. 
It  is  for  their  sake  that  ministers  are  appointed  in  the 
Church.  I  have  no  idea  of  aggrandizing  the  clergy  at  the 
expense  of  the  laity;  nor  indeed  of  aggrandizing  them  at 
all.  Decent  means  of  living  is  all  they  have  a  right  to  ex- 
pect. But  I  can  not  conceive  that  the  laity  can,  with  any 
propriety,  be  admitted  to  sit  in  judgment  on  bishops  and  \ 
presbyters;  especially  when  deposition  may  be  the  event; 
because  they  can  not  take  away  a  character  which  they 
can  not  confer.  It  is  incongruous  to  every  idea  of  Episco- 
pal government.  That  authority  which  confers  power,  can, 
for  proper  reasons,  take  it  away.  But  where  there  is  no 
authority  to  confer  power,  there  can  be  none  to  disannul  it. 
Wherever  therefore  the  power  of  ordination  is  lodged,  the  } 
power  of  deprivation  is  lodged  also. 

Should  it  be   thought  necessary  that  the  laity  should 


346  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

have  a  share  in  the  choice  of  their  bishop,  if  it  can  be  put  on 
a  proper  footing,  so  as  to  avoid  party  and  confusion,  I  see 
not  but  that  it  might  be  admitted.  But  I  do  not  apprehend 
that  this  was  the  practice  of  the  primitive  Church.  In 
short,  the  rights  of  the  Christian  Church  arise,  not  from 
nature  or  compact,  but  from  the  institution  of  Christ;  and 
we  ought  not  to  alter  them,  but  to  receive  and  maintain 
them  as  the  holy  apostles  left  them.  The  government, 
sacraments,  faith,  and  doctrine  of  the  Church,  are  fixed 
and  settled.  We  have  a  right  to  examine  ivhat  they  are, 
but  we  must  take  them  as  they  are.  If  we  new  model  the 
government,  why  not  the  sacraments,  creeds,  and  doctrines 
of  the  Church  ?  But  then  it  would  not  be  Christ's  Church, 
but  our  Church,  and  would  remain  so,  call  it  by  what  name 
we  please. 

I  do  therefore  beseech  the  clergy  and  laity,  who  shall 
meet  at  Philadelphia,  to  reconsider  the  matter,  before  a 
final  step  be  taken:  and  to  endeavor  to  bring  their  Church 
government  as  near  to  the  primitive  pattern  as  may  be. 
They  will  find  it  the  simplest  and  most  easy  to  carry  into 
effect;  and  if  it  be  adhered  to,  will  be  in  no  danger  of 
sinking  or  failing. 

I  do  not  think  it  necessary  that  the  Church,  in  every 
state,  should  be  just  as  the  Church  in  Connecticut  is; 
though  I  think  that  the  best  model.  Particular  circum- 
stances, I  know,  will  call  for  particular  considerations. 
But  in  so  essential  a  matter  as  Church  government  is,  no 
alteration  should  be  made  to  affect  its  foundation.  If  a 
man  be  called  a  bishop  who  has  not  the  Episcopal  jxnver 
of  government,  he  is  called  by  a  wrong  name,  even  though 
he  should  have  the  power  of  ordination  and  confirmation. 

Let  me  therefore  again  entreat,  that  such  material  al- 
terations, and  forgive  me  if  I  say  unjustifiable  ones,  may 
not  be  made  in  the  government  of  the  Church.  I  have 
written  freely,  as  becomes  an  honest  man;  and  in  a  case 
which  I  think  calls  for  freedom  of  sentiment  and  expression. 
I  wish  not  to  give  offence,  and  I  hope  none  will  be  taken. 


APPENDIX.  347 

Whatever  I  can  do  consistently  to  assist  in  procuring  bish- 
ops in  America,  I  shall  do  cheerfully,  but  beyond  that  I 
can  not  go;  and  I  am  sure  neither  you,  nor  any  of  the 
friends  of  the  Church,  would  wish  I  should. 

If  any  expression  in  this  letter  should  seem  too  warm,  I 
will  be  ready  to  correct  the  mode,  but  the  sentiments  I 
must  retain  till  I  find  them  wrong,  and  then  I  will  freely 
give  them  up.  In  this  matter  I  am  not  interested;  my 
ground  is  taken,  and  I  wish  not  to  extend  my  authority 
beyond  its  proper  limits.  But  I  do  most  earnestly  wish  to 
have  our  churches  in  all  the  states  so  settled,  that  it  may 
be  one  Church  united  in  government,  doctrine,  and  disci- 
pline— that  there  may  be  no  division  among  us — no  oppo- 
sition of  interests — no  clashing  of  opinions.  And  permit 
me  to  hope  that  you  will,  at  your  approaching  convention, 
so  far  recede  in  the  points  I  have  mentioned,  as  to  make 
this  practicable.  Your  convention  will  be  large  and  very 
much  to  be  respected.  Its  determination  will  influence 
many  of  the  American  States,  and  posterity  will  be  ma- 
terially affected  by  them. 

These  considerations  are  so  many  arguments  for  calm 
and  cool  deliberation.  Human  passions  and  prejudiccb, 
and,  if  possible,  infirmities,  should  be  laid  aside.  A  wrong 
step  will  be  attended  with  dreadful  consequences.  Pa- 
tience and  prudence  must  be  exercised.  And  should  there 
be  some  circumstances  that  press  hard  for  a  remedy,  hasty 
decisions  will  hot  mend  them.  In  doubtful  cases  they  will 
probably  have  a  bad  effect. 

May  the  Spirit  of  God  be  with  you  at  Philadelphia,  and  as 
I  persuade  myself  the  sole  good  of  His  Church  is  the  sole 
aim  of  you  all,  I  hope  for  the  best  effects  from  your  meeting. 

I  send  you  the  alterations  which  it  has  been  here  thought 
proper  to  make  in  the  Liturgy,  to  accommodate  it  to  the 
civil  constitution  of  this  state.  You  will  observe,  that 
there  is  no  Collect  for  the  Congress.  We  have  no  back- 
wardness in  that  respect,  but  thought  it  our  duty  to  know 
whether  the  civil  authority  in  this  state  has  any  directions 


348  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

to  give  in  that  matter;  and  that  can  not  be  known  till  their 
next  meeting  in  October. 

Some  other  alterations  were  proposed,  of  which  Mr. 
Ferguson  took  a  copy;  and  I  would  send  you  a  copy  had  I 
time  to  transcribe  it. 

The  matter  will  be  resumed  at  New  Haven  the  nth  of 
September.  Should  we  come  to  any  determination,  the 
brethren  to  the  southward  shall  be  informed  of  it. 

With  my  best  regards  to  the  convention  and  to  you,  I 
remain  your  affectionate  humble  servant, 

(Signed,)  SAMUEL, 

Biihop  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Connecticut. 

I  have  taken  the  liberty  to  enclose  a  copy  of  my  letters 
of  consecration,  which  you  will  please  to  communicate  to 
the  convention;  you  will  also  perceive  it  to  be  my  wish 
that  this  letter  should  be  communicated  to  them;  to  which, 
I  presume,  there  can  be  no  objection. 


No.  5.     Page  114. 
Address  of  the  Convention  of  1785,  to  the  English  Prelates. 

To  the  Most  Reverend  and  Right  Reverend  the  Archbishops  of  Canter- 
bury and  York,  and  the  Bishops  of  the  Church  of  England. 

We,  the  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  sundry  of  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica, think  it  our  duty  to  address  your  Lordships  on  a  sub- 
ject deeply  interesting,  not  only  to  ourselves  and  those 
whom  we  represent,  but,  as  we  conceive,  to  the  common 
cause  of  Christianity. 

Our  forefathers,  when  they  left  the  land  of  their  nativity, 
did  not  leave  the  bosom  of  that  Church,  over  which  your 
Lordships  now  preside;  but,  as  well  from  a  veneration  for 
Episcopal  government,  as  from  an  attachment  to  the  admi- 
rable services  of  our  Liturgy,  continued  in  willing  connection 
with  their  ecclesiastical  superiors  in  England,  and  were 


APPENDIX,  349 

subjected  to  many  local  inconveniencies,  rather  than  break 
the  unity  of  the  Church  to  which  they  belonged. 

When  it  pleased  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  universe,  that 
this  part  of  the  British  Empire  should  be  free,  sovereign, 
and  independent,  it  became  the  most  important  concern  of 
the  members  of  our  communion  to  provide  for  its  continu- 
ance. And  while,  in  accomplishing  this,  they  kept  in  view 
that  wise  and  liberal  part  of  the  system  of  the  Church  of 
England,  which  excludes  as  well  the  claiming  as  the  ac- 
knowledging of  such  spiritual  subjection  as  may  be  incon- 
sistent with  the  civil  duties  of  her  children,  it  was  never- 
theless their  earnest  desire  and  resolution  to  retain  the 
venerable  form  of  Episcopal  government,  handed  down  to 
them,  as  they  conceived,  from  the  time  of  the  apostles;  and 
endeared  to  them,  by  the  remembrance  of  the  holy  bishops 
of  the  primitive  Church,  of  the  blessed  martyrs  who  re- 
formed the  doctrine  and  worship  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  of  the  many  great  and  pious  prelates  who  have  adorned 
that  Church  in  every  succeeding  age.  But  however  gener- 
al the  desire  of  completing  the  orders  of  our  ministry,  so 
diffused  and  unconnected  were  the  members  of  our  com- 
munion over  this  extensive  country,  that  much  time  and 
negotiation  were  necessary  for  the  forming  of  a  representa- 
tive body  of  the  greater  number  of  the  Episcopalians  in 
these  states;  and  owing  to  the  same  causes,  it  was  not 
until  this  convention,  that  sufficient  powers  could  be  pro- 
cured for  the  addressing  of  your  Lordships  on  this  subject. 

The  petition  which  we  offer  to  your  venerable  body  is — 
that  from  a  tender  regard  to  the  religious  interests  of  thou- 
sands in  this  rising  empire,  professing  the  same  religious 
principles  with  the  Church  of  England,  you  will  be  pleased 
to  confer  the  Episcopal  character  on  such  persons  as  shall 
be  recommended  by  this  Church  in  the  several  states  here 
represented;  full  satisfaction  being  given  of  the  sufficiency 
of  the  persons  recommended,  and  of  its  being  the  intention 
of  the  general  body  of  the  Episcopalians  in  the  said  states 
respectively,  to  receive  them  in  the  quality  of  bishops. 


350  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Whether  this,  our  request,  will  meet  with  insurmount- 
able impediments,  from  the  political  regulations  of  the  king- 
dom in  which  your  Lordships  fill  such  distinguished  stations, 
it  is  not  for  us  to  foresee.  We  have  not  ascertained  that  any 
such  will  exist;  and  are  humbly  of  opinion,  that  as  citizens 
of  these  states,  interested  in  their  prosperity,  and  religiously 
regarding  the  allegiance  which  we  owe  them,  it  is  to  an  ec- 
clesiastical source  only  we  can  apply  in  the  present  exigency. 

It  maybe  of  consequence  to  observe,  that  in  these  states 
there  is  a  separation  between  the  concerns  of  policy,  and 
those  of  religion;  that  accordingly,  our  civil  rulers  can  not 
officially  join  in  the  present  application;  that,  however,  we 
are  far  from  apprehending  the  opposition  or  even  displeas- 
ure of  any  of  those  honorable  personages;  and,  finally,  that 
in  this  business  we  are  justified  by  the  constitutions  of  the 
states,  which  are  the  foundations  and  control  of  all  our  laws. 
On  this  point  we  beg  leave  to  refer  to  the  enclosed  extracts 
from  the  constitutions  of  the  respective  states  of  which  we 
are  citizens,  and  we  flatter  ourselves  that  they  must  be 
satisfactory. 

Thus,  we  have  stated  to  your  Lordships  the  nature  and 
the  grounds  of  our  application;  which  we  have  thought  it 
most  respectful  and  most  suitable  to  the  magnitude  of  the 
object,  to  address  to  your  Lordships  for  your  deliberation, 
before  any  person  is  sent  over  to  carry  them  into  effect. 
Whatever  may  be  the  event,  no  time  will  efface  the  re- 
membrance of  the  past  services  of  your  Lordships  and  your 
predecessors.  The  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  were  not 
prevented,  even  by  the  weighty  concerns  of  their  high  sta- 
tions, from  attending  to  the  interests  of  this  distant  branch 
of  the  Church  under  their  care.  The  Bishops  of  London 
were  our  diocesans;  and  the  uninterrupted,  although  volun- 
tary submission  of  our  congregations,  will  remain  a  per- 
petual proof  of  their  mild  and  paternal  government.  All 
the  bishops  of  England,  with  other  distinguished  characters, 
as  well  ecclesiastical  as  civil,  have  concurred  in  forming  and 
carrying  on  the  benevolent  views  of  the  Society  for  the  Prop- 


APPENDIX.  351 

agation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts;  a  society  to  whom, 
under  God,  the  prosperity  of  our  Church  is  in  an  eminent 
degree  to  be  ascribed.  It  is  our  earnest  wish  to  be  per- 
mitted to  make,  through  your  Lordships,  this  just  acknowl- 
edgment to  that  venerable  society;  a  tribute  of  gratitude 
which  we  the  rather  take  this  opportunity  of  paying,  as 
while  they  thought  it  necessary  to  withdraw  their  pecu- 
niary assistance  from  our  ministers,  they  have  endeared 
their  past  favors  by  a  benevolent  declaration,  that  it  is  far 
from  their  thoughts  to  alienate  their  affection  from  their 
brethren  now  under  another  government;  with  the  pious 
wish,  that  their  former  exertions  may  still  continue  to  bring 
forth  the  fruits  they  aimed  at,  of  pure  religion  and  virtue. 
Our  hearts  are  penetrated  with  the  most  lively  gratitude 
by  these  general  sentiments;  the  long  succession  of  former 
benefits  passes  in  review  before  us;  we  pray  that  our  Church 
may  be  a  lasting  monument  of  the  usefulness  of  so  worthy 
a  body;  and  that  her  sons  may  never  cease  to  be  kindly 
affectioned  to  the  members  of  that  Church,  the  fathers  of 
which  have  so  tenderly  watched  over  her  infancy. 

For  your  Lordships  in  particular,  we  most  sincerely  wish 
and  pray,  that  you  may  long  continue  the  ornaments  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  at  last  receive  the  reward  of  the 
righteous,  from  the  great  Shepherd  and  Bishop  of  souls. 

We  are,  with  all  the  respect  which  is  due  to  your  exalt- 
ed and  venerable  characters  and  stations, 

Your  Lordships 

Most  obedient,  and 

Most  humble  servants.* 

In  Convention, 
Christ  Church,  Philadelphia,  October  $th,  1785. 

The  preceding  address  and  consequent  measures  for  ob- 
taining the  Episcopacy,  were  contemplated  by  the  following 
plan  of  the  convention,  recorded  on  their  journal.  Ordered: 

First,  That  this  convention  address  the  archbishops  and 

*  Signed  by  all  the  members. 


352  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

bishops  of  the  Church  of  England,  requesting  them  to  con- 
fer the  Episcopal  character  on  such  persons  as  shall  be 
chosen  and  recommended  to  them  for  that  purpose,  from 
the  conventions  of  this  Church  in  the  respective  states. 

Secondly,  That  it  be  recommended  to  the  said  conven- 
tions, that  they  elect  persons  for  this  purpose. 

Thirdly,  That  it  be  further  recommended  to  the  different 
conventions,  at  their  next  respective  sessions,  to  appoint 
committees,  with  powers,  to  correspond  with  the  English 
bishops  for  the  carrying  of  these  resolutions  into  effect;  and 
that,  until  such  committees  shall  be  appointed,  they  be  re- 
quested to  direct  any  communications  which  they  may  be 
pleased  to  make  on  this  subject  to  the  committee,  consist- 
ing of  the  Rev.  Dr.  White,  president,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Provoost,  the  Honorable  James  Duane,  Esq., 
and  Samuel  Powell  and  Richard  Peters,  Esqs. 

Fourthly,  That  it  be  further  recommended  to  the  different 
conventions,  that  they  pay  especial  attention  to  the  making 
it  appear  to  their  Lordships,  that  the  persons  who  shall  be 
sent  to  them  for  consecration,  are  desired  in  the  character 
of  bishops,  as  well  by  the  laity  as  by  the  clergy  of  this 
Church,  in  the  said  states  respectively;  and  that  they  will 
be  received  by  them  in  that  character  on  their  return. 

Fifthly,  And  in  order  to  assure  their  Lordships  of  the 
legality  of  the  present  proposed  application,  that  the  depu- 
ties now  assembled  be  desired  to  make  a  respectful  address 
to  the  civil  rulers  of  the  states  in  which  they  respectively 
reside,  to  certify  that  the  said  application  is  not  contrary  to 
the  constitutions  and  laws  of  the  same. 

Sixthly,  And,  whereas,  the  bishops  of  this  Church  will 
not  be  entitled  to  any  of  such  temporal  honors  as  are  due 
to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  the  parent  Church,  in 
quality  of  lords  of  parliament;  and  whereas  the  reputation 
and  usefulness  of  our  bishops  will  considerably  depend  on 
their  taking  no  higher  titles  or  style  than  will  be  due  to 
their  spiritual  employment;  that  it  be  recommended  to  this 
Church  in  the  states  here  represented,  to  provide,  that  their 


APPENDIX.  353 

respective  bishops  may  be  called,  "The  Right  Rev.  A.  B., 
Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  C.  D."  and, 
as  bishop,  may  have  no  other  title;  and  may  not  use  any 
such  style  as  is  usually  descriptive  of  temporal  power  and 
precedency. 


No.  6.     Page  125. 
Letter  of  the  English  Prelates. 

LONDON,  FEBRUARY  24,  1786. 

To  the  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in 
sundry  of  the  United  States  of  Amenta. 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  hath  received  an  address, 
dated  in  convention,  Christ  Church,  Philadelphia,  Octo- 
ber 5,  1785,  from  the  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church  in  sundry  of  the  United  States  of 
America,  directed  to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  Eng- 
land, and  requesting  them  to  confer  the  Episcopal  character 
on  such  persons  as  shall  be  recommended  by  the  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  several  states  by  them  represented. 

This  brotherly  and  Christian  address  was  communicated 
to  the  Archbishop  of  York,  and  to  the  bishops,  with  as  much 
despatch  as  their  separate  and  distant  situations  would  per- 
mit, and  hath  been  received  and  considered  by  them  with 
that  true  and  affectionate  regard  which  they  have  always 
shown  towards  their  Episcopal  brethren  in  America. 

We  are  now  enabled  to  assure  you,  that  nothing  is  nearer 
to  our  hearts  than  the  wish  to  promote  your  spiritual  welfare, 
to  be  instrumental  in  procuring  for  you  the  complete  exer- 
cise of  our  holy  religion,  and  the  enjoyment  of  that  ecclesi- 
astical constitution,  which  we  believe  to  be  truly  apostolical 
and  for  which  you  express  so  unreserved  a  veneration. 

We  are  therefore  happy  to  be  informed,  that  this  pious 
design  is  not  likely  to  receive  any  discountenance  from  the 
civil  powers  under  which  you  live;  and  we  desire  you  to  be 


354  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

persuaded,  that  we,  on  our  parts,  will  use  our  best  endeav- 
ors, which  we  have  good  reason  to  hope  will  be  successful, 
to  acquire  a  legal  capacity  of  complying  with  the  prayer  of 
your  address. 

With  these  sentiments  we  are  disposed  to  make  every 

allowance  which  candor  can  suggest  for  the  difficulties  of 

your  situation;  but,  at  the  same  time,  we  can  not  help  being 

j  afraid,  that,  in  the  proceedings  of  your  convention,  some 

;  alterations  may  have  been  adopted  or  intended,  which  those 

i  difficulties  do  not  seem  to  justify. 

Those  alterations  are  not  mentioned  in  your  address, 
and,  as  our  knowledge  of  them  is  no  more  than  what  has 
reached  us  through  private  and  less  certain  channels,  we 
hope  you  will  think  it  just,  both  to  you  and  to  ourselves,  if 
we  wait  for  an  explanation. 

For  while  we  are  anxious  to  give  every  proof,  not  only 
of  our  brotherly  affection,  but  of  our  facility  in  forwarding 
your  wishes,  we  can  not  but  be  extremely  cautious,  lest  we 
should  be  the  instruments  of  establishing  an  ecclesiastical 
system  which  will  be  called  a  branch  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, but  afterwards  may  possibly  appear  to  have  departed 
from  it  essentially,  either  in  doctrine  or  in  discipline. 

In  the  mean  time,  we  heartily  commend  you  to  God's 
holy  protection,  and  are,  your  affectionate  brethren, 

J.  ROCHESTER,  T.  CANTUAR, 

R.  WORCESTER,  W.  EBOR, 

I.  OXFORD,  R.  LONDON, 

I.  EXETER,  W.  CHICHESTER, 

THO.  LINCOLN,  C.  BATH  &  WELLS, 

JOHN  BANGOR,  S.  ST.  ASAPH, 

I.  LICHFIELD  &  COVENTRY, 

S.  GLOUCESTER,  S.  SARUM, 

E.  ST.  DAVID'S,  J.  PETERBOROUGH, 

CHR.  BRISTOL,  JAMES  ELY. 

T»  tht  Reverend  and  Honorable  the  Clerical  and  Lay  Dtputiet  of  the  Protestant  Epiteofil 
Church  in  tundry  of  the  United  States  of  America,  Philadelphia. 


APPENDIX.  355 

No.  7.     Page  137. 

A  Memorial  from  the  Convention  in  New  Jersey,  to  the  Gen- 
eral Convention  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the 
United  States  of  A  merica,  to  be  held  in  the  City  of  Phila- 
delpliia  in  June  next. 

The  Memorial  of  the  Convention  of  the  said  Church  in  New  Jersey,  now 
held  in  the  City  of  Perth  Amboy, 

RESPECTFULLY  SHOWETH, 

That  your  Memorialists  have  unanimously  approved  of 
the  alterations  in  the  Liturgy  as  they  appear  in  the  new 
Prayer  Book,  to  render  it  consistent  with  the  American 
revolution  and  the  constitutions  of  the  respective  states,  as 
made  and  concluded  on  by  the  late  General  Convention  of 
said  Church,  held  at  Philadelphia  in  September  and  Octo- 
ber last;  they  being  satisfactory  and  agreeable  to  their 
wish. 

They  have  also  approved  of  their  plan  for  obtaining 
consecration  of  bishops;  and  pursuant  to  their  recommen- 
dation, have  appointed  a  committee  to  correspond  with  the 
English  bishops  for  that  purpose. 

They  have  also,  with  great  pleasure,  considered  their 
address  to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  the  Church  of 
England;  which  your  Memorialists  are  of  opinion,  was  prop- 
erly calculated  to  obtain  the  end  proposed. 

But  it  is  with  the  greatest  concern  they  are  constrained 
to  remark,  that  the  other  proceedings  of  the  said  conven- 
tion, in  their  opinion,  have  an  undoubted  tendency  to  pro- 
long, if  not  entirely  prevent,  the  obtaining  the  prayer 
thereof.  In  this  opinion  your  Memorialists  conceive  they 
are  supported  by  the  answer  of  the  said  venerable  bishops, 
with  a  copy  of  which  they  have  been  favored  during  their 
sitting  at  this  place;  for  which  reason,  among  others,  they 
did  not  ratify,  but  disapproved  of  the  other  parts  of  the 
proceedings  of  the  said  late  General  Convention. 


356  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Your  Memorialists  do  not  question  the  right  of  every 
national  or  independent  Church,  to  make  such  alterations, 
from  time  to  time,  in  the  mode  of  its  public  worship,  as 
upon  mature  consideration  may  be  found  expedient;  but 
they  doubt  the  right  of  any  order  or  orders  of  men  in  an 
Episcopal  Church,  without  a  bishop,  to  make  any  altera- 
tions not  warranted  by  immediate  necessity;  especially 
such  as  not  only  go  to  the  mode  of  its  worship,  but  also  to 
its  doctrines.  Wherefore  your  Memorialists  can  not  for-  / 
bear  remarking,  that  in  their  opinion,  all  unnecessary  al- 
terations must  be  unseasonable  and  impolitic,  and  will 
prove  highly  detrimental  to  the  Church  in  general. 

Your  Memorialists  can  not  approve  of  the  said  late  Gen- 
eral Convention  having  published,  in  the  manner  they  have, 
the  new  Book  of  Common  Prayer  as  altered,  with  the 
psalms  and  calendar  transposed  and  changed  by  their  com- 
mittee without  their  revision  and  express  approbation;  but 
since  they  have  done  so,  and  if  it  was  proper  to  have  been 
considered,  your  Memorialists  have  to  regret,  that  the 
same  was  not  sooner  published,  that  they  might  have  been 
enabled  to  have  declared  the  sentiments  of  their  constit- 
uents as  well  as  their  own.  The  prejudices  and  prepos- 
sessions of  mankind  in  favor  of  old  customs,  especially  in 
religious  matters,  are  generally  so  strong  as  to  require 
great  delicacy  and  caution  in  the  introduction  of  any  alter- 
ations or  innovations,  although  manifestly  for  the  better; 
which  was  also  one  reason  why  they  could  not  at  this  time 
ratify  the  alterations,  so  unnecessarily  made;  and  they  are 
very  apprehensive,  that  until  alterations  can  be  made  con- 
si-tent  with  the  customs  of  the  primitive  Church,  and  with  . 
the  rules  of  the  Church  of  England,  from  which  it  is  our  » 
boast  to  have  descended,  a  ratification  of  them  would  cre- 
ate great  uneasiness  in  the  minds  of  many  members  of  the 
Church,  and  in  great  probability  cause  dissensions  and 
schisms.  Although  they  may  not  disapprove  of  all  the 
alterations  made  in  the  said  new  book,  yet  they  have  to 
regret  the  unseasonableness  and  irregularity  of  them. 


APPENDIX.  357 

Your  Memorialists,  having  an  anxious  desire  of  cement- 
ing, perpetuating,  and  extending  the  union  so  happily  be- 
gun in  the  Church,  with  all  deference  and  submission,  hum- 
bly request  and  entreat  the  said  General  Convention,  now 
soon  to  meet,  that  they  will  revise  the  proceedings  of  the 
said  late  convention  and  their  aforesaid  committee,  and  re- 
move every  cause  that  may  have  excited  any  jealousy  or 
fear,  that  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  \ 
America  have  any  intention  or  desire  essentially  to  depart, 
either  in  doctrine  or  discipline  from  the  Church  of  Eng-  / 
land;  but,  on  the  contrary,  to  convince  the  world  that  it  is  / 
their  wish  and  intention,  to  maintain  the  doctrines  of  the 
Gospel  as  now  held  by  the  Church  of  England,  and  to  ad- 
here to  the  Liturgy  of  the  said  Church  as  far  as  shall  be 
consistent  with  the  American  revolution,  and  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  respective  states;  thereby  removing  every  ob- 
stacle  in  the  way  of  obtaining  the  consecration  of  such  and 
so  many  persons  to  the  Episcopal  character  as  shall  render 
our  ecclesiastical  government  complete,  and  secure  to  the 
Episcopalians  in  America,  and  to  their  descendants,  a  suc- 
cession of  that  necessary  order:  And  that  they  will  use  all 
means  in  their  power  to  promote  and  perpetuate  harmony 
and  unanimity  among  ourselves,  and  with  the  said  Church 
of  England  as  a  mother  or  sister  Church,  and  with  every 
Protestant  Church  in  the  universe. 

By  order  of  the  convention, 

ABRAHAM   BEACH,  President. 

Perth  Amboy,  May  19,  1786. 


358  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No.  8.     Page  137. 
Second  Address  to  the  English  Prelates. 

To  Ihe  Most  Reverend  and  Right  Reverend  Fathers  in  God,  the  Arch- 
bishops and  Bishops  of  the  Church  of  England. 

MOST  WORTHY  AND  VENERABLE  PRELATES, 

We,  the  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  States  of  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and  South 
Carolina,  have  received  the  friendly  and  affectionate  letter 
which  your  Lordships  did  us  the  honor  to  write  on  the  24th 
day  of  February,  and  for  which  we  request  you  to  accept 
our  sincere  and  grateful  acknowledgments. 

It  gives  us  pleasure  to  be  assured,  that  the  success  of  our 
application  will  probably  meet  with  no  greater  obstacles 
than  what  have  arisen  from  doubts  respecting  the  extent  of 
the  alterations  we  have  made  and  proposed;  and  we  are  hap- 
py to  learn,  that  as  no  political  impediments  oppose  us  here, 
those  which  at  present  exist  in  England  may  be  removed. 

While  doubts  remain  of  our  continuing  to  hold  the  same 
essential  articles  of  faith  and  discipline  with  the  Church  of 
England,  we  acknowledge  the  propriety  of  suspending  a 
compliance  with  our  request. 

We  are  unanimous  and  explicit  in  assuring  your  Lord- 
ships, that  we  neither  have  departed  nor  propose  to  depart 
from  the  doctrines  of  your  Church.  We  have  retained  the 
same  discipline  and  forms  of  worship,  as  far  as  was  consist- 
ent with  our  civil  constitutions;  and  we  have  made  no 
alterations  or  omissions  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
but  such  as  that  consideration  prescribed,  and  such  as  were 
calculated  to  remove  objections,  which  it  appeared  to  us 
more  conducive  to  union  and  general  content  to  obviate, 
than  to  dispute.  It  is  well  known,  that  many  great  and 
pious  men  of  the  Church  of  England  have  long  wished  for 
a  revision  of  the  Liturgy,  which  it  was  deemed  imprudent  to 
hazard,  lest  it  might  become  a  precedent  for  repeated  and 


APPENDIX.  3^9 

improper  alterations.  This  is  with  us  the  proper  season 
for  such  a  revision.  We  are  now  settling  and  ordering  the 
affairs  of  our  Church,  and  if  wisely  done,  we  shall  have 
reason  to  promise  ourselves  all  the  advantages  that  can 
result  from  stability  and  union. 

We  are  anxious  to  complete  our  Episcopal  system  by 
means  of  the  Church  of  England.  We  esteem  and  prefer 
it,  and  with  gratitude  acknowledge  the  patronage  and  fa- 
vors for  which,  while  connected,  we  have  constantly  been 
indebted  to  that  Church.  These  considerations,  added  to 
that  of  agreement  in  faith  and  worship,  press  us  to  repeat 
our  former  request,  and  to  endeavor  to  remove  your  pres- 
ent hesitation,  by  sending  you  our  proposed  ecclesiastical 
Constitution  and  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

These  documents,  we  trust,  will  afford  a  full  answer  to 
every  question  that  can  arise  on  the  subject.  We  consider 
your  Lordships'  letter  as  very  candid  and  kind;  we  repose  full 
confidence  in  the  assurances  it  gives;  and  that  confidence, 
together  with  the  liberality  and  Catholicism  of  your  venerable 
body,  leads  us  to  flatter  ourselves,  that  you  will  not  disclaim 
a  branch  of  your  Church  merely  for  having  been  in  your 
Lordships'  opinion,  if  that  should  be  the  case,  pruned  rather 
more  closely  than  its  separation  made  absolutely  necessary. 

We  have  only  to  add,  that  as  our  Church  in  sundry  of 
these  states  has  already  proceeded  to  the  election  of  per- 
sons to  be  sent  for  consecration,  and  others  may  soon  pro- 
ceed to  the  same,  we  pray  to  be  favored  with  as  speedy  an 
answer  to  this,  our  second  address,  as  in  your  great  good- 
ness you  were  pleased  to  give  to  our  former  one. 
We  are, 

With  great  and  sincere  respect, 

Most  worthy  and  venerable  Prelates, 
Your  obedient,  and 

Very  humble  servants,* 

In  Convention, 
Christ  Church,  Philadelphia,  June  26,  1786. 

*  Signed  by  all  the  members. 


3*6c  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 


No.  9.     Page  137. 

Communications  from  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 

York. 

To  the  Committee  of  the  General  Convention  at  Philadelphia,  the  Rev. 
Dr.  White,  President,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Provoosi, 
the  Honorable  James  Duane,  Samuel  Powell,  and  Richard  Peters, 
Esqs. 

Mr.  PRESIDENT,  AND  GENTLEMEN, 

Influenced  by  the  same  sentiments  of  fraternal  regard, 
expressed  by  the  archbishops  and  bishops  in  their  answer 
to  your  address,  we  desire  you  to  be  persuaded,  that  if  we 
have  not  yet  been  able  to  comply  with  your  request,  the 
delay  has  proceeded  from  no  tardiness  on  our  part.  The 
only  cause  of  it  has  been  the  uncertainty  in  which  we  were 
left  by  receiving  your  address  unaccompanied  by  those  com- 
munications with  regard  to  your  Liturgy,  Articles,  and  ec- 
clesiastical constitution,  without  the  knowledge  of  which 
we  could  not  presume  to  apply  to  the  legislature,  for  such 
powers  as  were  necessary  to  the  completion  of  your  wishes. 
The  journal  of  the  convention,  and  the  first  part  of  your 
Liturgy,  did  not  reach  us  till  more  than  two  months  after 
our  receipt  of  your  address;  and  we  were  not  in  possession 
of  the  remaining  part  of  it  and  of  your  Articles,  till  the  last 
day  of  April.  The  whole  of  your  communications  was  then, 
with  as  little  delay  as  possible,  taken  into  consideration,  at 
a  meeting  of  the  archbishops  and  fifteen  of  the  bishops, 
being  all  who  were  then  in  London  and  able  to  attend;  and 
it  was  impossible  not  to  observe,  with  concern,  that  if  the 
essential  doctrines  of  our  common  faith  were  retained,  less 
respect  however,  was  paid  to  our  Liturgy  than  its  own  ex- 
cellence, and  your  declared  attachment  to  it,  had  led  us  to 
expect.  Not  to  mention  a  variety  of  verbal  alterations,  of 
the  necessity  or  propriety  of  which  we  are  by  no  means  sat- 
isfied, we  saw  with  grief,  that  two  of  the  confessions  of  our 


APPENDIX.  361 

Christian  faith;  respectable  for  their  antiquity,  have  been 
entirely  laid  aside;  and  that  even  in  that  which  is  called 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  an  article  is  omitted,  which  was 
thought  necessary  to  be  inserted,  with  a  view  to  a  partic-  i 
ular  heresy,  in  a  very  early  age  of  the  Church,  and  has  ever 
since  had  the  venerable  sanction  of  universal  reception. 
Nevertheless,  as  a  proof  of  the  sincere  desire  which  we  feel 
to  continue  in  spiritual  communion  with  the  members  of 
your  Church  in  America,  and  to  complete  the  orders  of  your 
ministry,  and  trusting  that  the  communications  which  we 
shall  make  to  you  on  the  subject  of  these  and  some  other 
alterations,  will  have  their  desired  effect,  we  have,  even  un- 
der these  circumstances,  prepared  a  bill  for  conveying  to  us 
the  powers  necessary  for  this  purpose.  It  will  in  a  few  days 
be  presented  to  parliament,  and  we  have  the  best  reasons 
to  hope  that  it  will  receive  the  assent  of  the  legislature. 
This  bill  will  enable  the  archbishops  and  bishops  to  give 
Episcopal  consecration  to  the  persons  who  shall  be  recom- 
mended, without  requiring  from  them  any  oaths  or  sub- 
scriptions inconsistent  with  the  situation  in  which  the  late 
revolution  has  placed  them;  upon  condition  that  the  full 
satisfaction  of  the  sufficiency  of  the  persons  recommended, 
which  you  offer  to  us  in  your  address,  be  given  to  the  arch- 
bishops and  bishops.  You  will  doubtless  receive  it  as  a 
mark  both  of  our  friendly  disposition  toward  you,  and  of 
our  desire  to  avoid  all  delay  on  this  occasion,  that  we  have 
taken  this  earliest  opportunity  of  conveying  to  you  this 
intelligence,  and  that  we  proceed  (as  supposing  ourselves 
invested  with  that  power  which  for  your  sakes  we  have  re- 
quested) to  state  to  you  particularly  the  several  heads  upon 
which  that  satisfaction  which  you  offer  will  be  accepted, 
and  the  mode  in  which  it  may  be  given.  The  anxiety  which 
is  shown  by  the  Church  of  England  to  prevent  the  intru- 
sion of  unqualified  persons  into  even  the  inferior  offices  of 
our  ministry,  confirms  our  own  sentiments,  and  points  it 
out  to  be  our  duty,  very  earnestly  to  require  the  most  de- 
cisive proofs  of  the  qualifications  of  those  who  may  be 


362  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

offered  for  admission  to  that  order,  to  which  the  superin- 
tendence of  those  offices  is  committed.  At  our  several  or- 
dinations of  a  deacon  and  a  priest,  the  candidate  submits 
himself  to  the  examination  of  the  bishop  as  to  his  profi- 
ciency in  learning;  he  gives  the  proper  security  of  his  sound- 
ness in  the  faith  by  the  subscriptions  which  are  made  pre- 
viously necessary;  he  is  required  to  bring  testimonials  of 
his  virtuous  conversation  during  the  three  preceding  years; 
and  that  no  mode  of  inquiry  may  be  omitted,  public  notice 
of  his  offering  himself  to  be  ordained  is  given  in  the  parish 
church  where  he  resides  or  ministers,  and  the  people  are 
solemnly  called  upon  to  declare,  if  they  know  any  impedi- 
ment for  the  which  he  ought  not  to  be  admitted.  At  the 
time  of  ordination  too,  the  same  solemn  call  is  made  on 
the  congregation  then  present. 

Examination,  subscription,  and  testimonials  are  not  in- 
deed repeated  at  the  consecration  of  an  English  bishop,  be- 
cause the  person  to  be  consecrated  has  added  to  the  secu- 
rities given  at  his  former  ordinations,  that  sanction  which 
arises  from  his  having  constantly  lived  and  exercised  his 
ministry  under  the  eyes  and  observation  of  his  country. 
But  the  objects  of  our  present  consideration  are  very  differ- 
ently circumstanced;  their  sufficiency  in  learning,  the  sound- 
ness of  their  faith,  and  the  purity  of  their  manners,  are  not' 
matters  of  notoriety  here;  means  therefore  must  be  found 
to  satisfy  the  archbishop  who  consecrates,  and  the  bishops 
who  present  them,  that,  in  the  words  of  our  Church,  "  They 
be  apt  and  meet  for  their  learning  and  godly  conversation, 
to  exercise  their  ministry  duly  to  the  honor  of  God,  and 
the  edifying  of  His  Church,  and  to  be  wholesome  examples 
and  patterns  to  the  flock  of  Christ." 

With  regard  to  the  first  qualification,  sufficiency  in  good 
learning,  we  apprehend  that  the  subjecting  a  person  who 
is  to  be  admitted  to  the  office  of  a  bishop  in  the  Church,  to 
that  examination  which  is  required  previous  to  the  ordina- 
tion of  priests  and  deacons,  might  lessen  that  reverend 
estimation  which  ought  never  to  be  separated  from  the 


APPENDIX.  363 

Episcopal  character:  we  therefore  do  not  require  any  far- 
ther satisfaction  on  this  point,  than  will  be  given  to  us  by 
the  forms  of  testimonials  in  the  annexed  paper;  fully  trust- 
ing that  those  who  sign  them  will  be  well  aware,  how 
greatly  incompetence  in  this  respect  must  lessen  the  weight 
and  authority  of  the  bishop,  and  affect  the  credit  of  the 
Episcopal  Church. 

Under  the  second  head,  that  of  subscription,  our  desire 
is  to  require  that  subscription  only  to  be  repeated,  which 
you  have  already  been  called  upon  to  make  by  the  Tenth 
Article  of  your  ecclesiastical  constitution.  But  we  should 
forget  the  duty  which  we  owe  to  our  own  Church,  and  act 
inconsistently  with  that  sincere  regard  which  we  bear  to 
yours,  if  we  were  not  explicit  in  declaring,  that,  after  the 
disposition  we  have  shown  to  comply  with  the  prayer  of 
your  address,  we  think  it  now  incumbent  upon  you  to  use 
your  utmost  exertions  also  for  the  removal  of  any  stumbling- 
block  of  offence,  which  may  possibly  prove  an  obstacle  to 
the  success  of  it.  We  therefore  most  earnestly  exhort  you, 
that  previously  to  the  time  of  your  making  such  subscrip- 
tion, you  restore  to  its  integrity  the  Apostles'  Creed,  in 
which  you  have  omitted  an  article  merely,  as  it  seems,  from 
misapprehension  of  the  sense  in  which  it  is  understood  by 
our  Church;  nor  can  we  help  adding,  that  we  hope  you  will 
think  it  but  a  decent  proof  of  the  attachment  which  you 
profess  to  the  services  of  your  Liturgy,  to  give  to  the  other 
two  creeds  a  place  in  your  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  even 
though  the  use  of  them  should  be  left  discretional.  We 
should  be  inexcusable,  too,  if  at  the  time  when  you  are 
requesting  the  establishment  of  bishops  in  your  Church,  we  ,' 
did  not  strongly  represent  to  you  that  the  Eighth  Article  ' 
of  your  ecclesiastical  constitution  appears  to  us  to  be  a  deg- 
radation of  the  clerical,  and  still  more  of  the  Episcopal  char- 
acter. \Ve  persuade  ourselves,  that  in  your  ensuing  con- 
vention, some  alteration  will  be  thought  necessary  in  this 
article,  before  this  reaches  you;  or,  if  not,  that  due  atten- 
tion will  be  given,  to  it  in  consequence  of  our  representation. 


364  MEMOIRS  OF   THE    CHURCH. 

On  the  third  and  last  head,  which  respects  purity  of 
manners,  the  reputation  of  the  Church,  both  in  England 
and  America,  and  the  interest  of  our  common  Christianity, 
is  so  deeply  concerned  in  it,  that  we  feel  it  our  indispens- 
able duty  to  provide,  on  this  subject,  the  most  effectual 
securities.  It  is  presumed,  that  the  same  previous  public 
notice  of  the  intention  of  the  person  to  be  consecrated  will 
be  given  in  the  Church  where  he  resides  in  America,  for 
the  same  reasons,  and  therefore  nearly  in  the  same  form, 
with  that  used  in  England  before  our  ordinations.  The 
call  upon  the  persons  present  at  the  time  of  consecration, 
must  be  deemed  of  little  use  before  a  congregation  com- 
posed of  those  to  whom  the  person  to  be  consecrated  is 
unknown.  The  testimonials,  signed  by  persons  living  in 
England,  admit  of  reference  and  examination,  and  the  char- 
acters of  those  who  give  them  are  subject  to  scrutiny,  and, 
in  cases  of  criminal  deceit,  to  punishment.  In  proportion 
as  these  circumstances  are  less  applicable  to  testimonials 
from  America,  those  testimonials  must  be  more  explicit, 
and  supported  by  a  greater  number  of  signatures.  We  ' 
therefore  think  it  necessary  that  the  several  persons,  can- 
didates for  Episcopal  consecration,  should  bring  to_us  both 
a_  testimonial  from  the  General  Convention  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church,  with  as  many  signatures  as  can  be  obtained, 
and  a  more  particular  one  from  the  respective  conventions  •, 
in  those  states  which  recommend  them.  It  will  appear  \ 
from  the  tenor  of  the  letters  testimonial  used  in  England, 
a  form  of  which  is  annexed,  that  the  ministers  who  sign 
them  bear  testimony  to  the  qualifications  of  the  candidates 
on  their  own  personal  knowledge.  Such  a  testimony  is  not 
to  be  expected  from  the  members  of  the  General  Conven- 
tion* of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  America,  on  this  occasion. 
We  think  it  sufficient,  therefore,  that  they  declare  they 
know  no  impediment,  but  believe  the  person  to  be  conse- 
crated, is  of  a  virtuous  life  and  sound  faith.  We  have  sent 
you  such  a  form  as  appears  to  us  proper  to  be  used  for  that 
purpose.  More  specific  declarations  must  ,be  made,  by  the 


APPENDIX.  365 

members  of  the  convention  in  each  state  from  which  the 
persons  offered  for  consecration  are  respectively  recom- 
mended. Their  personal  knowledge  of  them  there  can  be 
no  doubt  of.  We  trust,  therefore,  they  will  have  no  ob- 
jection to  the  adoption  of  the  form  of  a  testimonial  wHich 
is  annexed,  and  drawn  up  on  the  same  principles,  and 
containing  the  same  attestations  of  personal  knowledge 
with  that  above  mentioned,  as  required  previously  to  our 
ordinations.  We  trust  we  shall  receive  these  testimonials 
signed  by  such  a  majority  in  each  convention  that  recom- 
mend, as  to  leave  no  doubt  of  the  fitness  of  the  candidates 
upon  the  minds  of  those  whose  consciences  are  concerned 
in  the  consecration  of  them. 

Thus  much  we  have  thought  it  right  to  communicate  to 
you  without  reserve  at  present,  intending  to  give  you  fur- 
ther information  as  soon  as  we  are  able.  In  the  mean 
time,  we  pray  God  to  direct  your  counsels  in  this  very 
weighty  matter,  and  are,  Mr.  President,  and  Gentlemen, 
your  affectionate  brethren, 

J.  CANTUAR. 

W.  EBOR. 


Form  of  a  Testimonial  for  Priest's  Orders  in  England. 

To  the  Right  Rev.   Father  in   God ,  by  Divine  Per- 

nlission  Lord  Bishop  of . 

We,  whose  names  are  here  underwritten,  testify  from 
our  personal  knowledge  of  the  life  and  behavior  of  A.  B., 
for  the  space  of  three  years  last  past,  that  he  hath,  during 
that  time,  lived  piously,  soberly  and  honestly:  Nor  hath  he 
at  any  time,  as  far  as  we  know  or  believe,  written,  taught, 
or  held,  any  thing  contrary  to  the  doctrine  or, discipline  of 
the  Church  of  England.  And,  moreover,  we  think  him  a 
person  worthy  to  be  admitted  to  the  sacred  order  of  priest. 
In  witness  whereof,  we  have  hereunto  set  our  hands.  Dated 
the  -  -  day  of ,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord . 


366  AfEAfOIKS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Testimony  from  the  General  Convention. 

We,  whose  names  are  underwritten,  fully  sensible  how 
important  it  is  that  the  sacred  office  of  a  bishop  should  not 
be  unworthily  conferred,  and  firmly  persuaded  that  it  is  our 
duty  to  bear  our  testimony  on  this  solemn  occasion  without 
partiality  or  affection,  do,  in  the  presence  of  Almighty 
God,  testify,  that  A.  B.  is  not,  so  far  as  we  are  informed, 
justly  liable  to  evil  report,  either  for  error  in  religion  or  for 
viciousness  of  life;  and  that  we  do  not  know  or  believe 
there  is  any  impediment  or  notable  crime,  on  account  of 
which  he  ought  not  to  be  consecrated  to  that  holy  office, 
but  that  he  hath  led  his  life,  for  the  three  years  last  past, 
piously,  soberly,  and  honestly. 


Testimony  from  the  Members  of  the  Convention  in  the  State  from  whence 
the  Person  is  recommended  for  Consecration. 

We,  whose  names  are  underwritten,  fully  sensible  how 
important  it  is  that  the  sacred  office  of  a  bishop  should  not 
be  unworthily  conferred,  and  firmly  persuaded  that  it  is  our 
duty  to  bear  testimony  on  this  solemn  occasion  without 
partiality  or  affection,  do,  in  the  presence  of  Almighty 
God,  testify,  that  A.  B.  is  not,  so  far  as  we  are  informed, 
justly  liable  to  evil  report  either  for  error  in  religion  or  for 
viciousness  of  life;  and  that  we  do  not  know  or  believe 
there  is  any  impediment  or  notable  crime  for  which  he 
ought  not  to  be  consecrated  to  that  holy  office.  We  do, 
moreover,  jointly  and  severally  declare,  that  having  per- 
sonally known  him  for  three  years  last  past,  we  do  in  our 
consciences  believe  him  to  be  of  such  sufficiency  in  good 
learning,  such  soundness  in  the  faith,  and  of  such  virtuous 
and  pure  manners  and  godly  conversation,  that  he  is  apt 
and  meet  to  exercise  the  office  of  a  bishop,  to  the  honor  of 
God  and  the  edifying  of  his  Church,  and  to  be  an  whole' 
some  example  to  the  flock  of  Christ. 


APPENDIX.  367 

No.  10.     Page  137. 
Communication  from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

CANTERBURY,  JULY  4,  1786. 
To  the  Committee  of  the  General  Convention,  etc. ,  etc. 

GENTLEMEN, 

The  enclosed  act  being  now  passed,  I  have  the  satisfac- 
tion of  communicating  it  to  you.     It  is  accompanied  by  a 
copy  of  a  letter,  and  some  forms  of  testimonials,   which 
I  sent  you  by  the  packet  of  last  month.     It  is  the  opin-  { 
ion  here,  that  no  more  than  three  bishops  should  be  con- 
secrated for  the  United  States  of  America;  who  may  con- 
secrate others  at  their  return,  if  more  be  found  necessary. 
But  whether   we  can    consecrate   any,    or   not,    must   yet 
depend  on  the  answers  we  may  receive,  to  what  we  have  \ 
written. 

I  am,  your  humble  servant, 

J.   CANTUAR. 


An  Act  to  empower  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  for  the  Time  being,  to  Consecrate  to  the  Office  of  a  Bishop, 
Persons  being  Subjects  or  Citizens  of  Countries  out  of  his  Majesty's 
Dominions. 

Whereas,  by  the  laws  of  this  realm  no  person  can  be 
consecrated  to  the  office  of  a  bishop,  without  the  King's 
license  for  his  election  to  that  office,  and  the  royal  mandate 
under  the  great  seal  for  his  confirmation  and  consecration: 
And,  whereas  every  person  who  shall  be  consecrated  to  the 
said  office,  is  required  to  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and 
supremacy,  and  also  the  oath  of  due  obedience  to  the 
archbishop:  And,  whereas  there  are  divers  persons  subjects 
or  citizens  of  countries  out  of  his  Majesty's  dominions,  in- 
habiting and  residing  within  the  said  countries,  who  profess 
the  public  worship  of  Almighty  God  according  to  the  prin- 


368  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

ciples  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  who,  in  order  to  pro- 
vide a  regular  succession  of  ministers  for  the  service  of  their 
Church,  are  desirous  of  having  certain  of  the  subjects  or 
citizens  of  those  countries  consecrated  bishops,  according 
to  the  form  of  consecration  in  the  Church  of  England:  Be 
it  enacted  by  the  King's  most  excellent  Majesty,  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  lords  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral, and  commons  in  this  present  parliament  assembled, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  that  from  and  after  the 
passing  of  this  act,  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and  for 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
for  the  time  being,  together  with  such  other  bishops  as 
they  shall  call  to  their  assistance,  to  consecrate  persons 
being  subjects  or  citizens  of  countries  out  of  his  Majesty's 
dominions,  bishops  for  the  purposes  aforesaid,  without  the 
King's  license  for  their  election,  or  the  royal  mandate  under 
the  great  seal  for  their  confirmation  and  consecration,  and 
without  requiring  them  to  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and 
supremacy,  and  the  oath  of  due  obedience  to  the  archbishop 
for  the  time  being.  Provided  always,  that  no  persons  shall 
be  consecrated  bishops  in  the  maaner  herein  provided,  un- 
til the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  for  the  time  being,  shall  have  first  applied  for, 
and  obtained  his  Majesty's  license,  by  warrant  under  his 
royal  signet  and  sign  manual,  authorizing  and  empowering 
him  to  perform  such  consecration,  and  expressing  the  name 
or  names  of  the  persons  so  to  be  consecrated;  nor  until  the 
said  archbishop  has  been  fully  ascertained  of  their  suffi- 
ciency in  good  learning,  of  the  soundness  of  their  faith,  and 
of  the  purity  of  their  manners.  Provided  also,  and  be  it 
hereby  declared,  that  no  person  or  persons  consecrated  to 
the  office  of  a  bishop  in  the  manner  aforesaid,  nor  any  per- 
son or  persons  deriving  their  consecration  from  or  under 
any  bishops  so  consecrated,  nor  any  person  or  persons 
admitted  to  the  order  of  deacon  or  priest  by  any  bishop  or 
bishops  so  consecrated,  or  by  the  successor  or  successors  of 
any  bishop  or  bishops  so  consecrated,  shall  be  thereby  en- 


APPENDIX.  369 

abled  to  exercise  his  or  their  respective  office  or  offices 
within  his  Majesty's  dominions.  Provided  always,  and  be 
it  further  enacted,  that  a  certificate  of  such  consecration 
shall  be  given  under  the  hand  and  seal  of  the  archbishop 
who  consecrates,  containing  the  name  of  the  person  so  con- 
secrated, with  the  addition  as  well  of  the  country  whereof 
he  is  a  subject  or  citizen,  as  of  the  Church  in  which  he  is 
appointed  bishop,  and  the  further  description  of  his  not 
having  taken  the  said  oaths,  being  exempted  from  the 
obligation  of  so  doing  by  virtue  of  this  act. 


No.  II.     Page  139. 
Address  to  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and  York. 

MOST  WORTHY  AND  VENERABLE  PRELATES, 

In  pursuance  of  your  Graces'  communications  to  the 
Standing  Committee  of  our  Church,  received  by  the  June 
packet,  and  the  letter  of  his  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, of  July  the  4th,  enclosing  the  act  of  parliament, 
"to  empower  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  for  the  time  being,  to  consecrate  to  the 
office  of  a  bishop,  persons  being  subjects  or  citizens  of  coun- 
tries out  of  his  Majesty's  dominions,"  a  General  Convention, 
now  sitting,  have  the  honor  of  offering  their  unanimous  and 
hearty  thanks  for  the  continuance  of  your  Christian  atten- 
tion to  this  Church;  and  particularly  for  your  having  so 
speedily  acquired  a  legal  capacity,  of  complying  with  the 
prayer  of  our  former  addresses. 

We  have  taken  into  our  most  serious  and  deliberate 
consideration,  the  several  matters  so  affectionately  recom- 
mended to  us  in  those  communications,  and  whatever  could 
be  done  towards  a  compliance  with  your  fatherly  wishes 
and  advice,  consistently  with  our  local  circumstances,  and 
the  peace  and  unity  of  our  Church,  hath  been  agreed  to; 


370  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

as,  we  trust,  will  appear  from  the  enclosed  act  of  our  con- 
vention, which  we  have  the  honor  to  transmit  to  you,  to- 
gether with  the  journal  of  our  proceedings. 

We  are,  with  great  and  sincere  respect, 
Most  worthy  and  venerable  prelates, 

Your  obedient  and  very  humble  servants, 
(By  order,) 

SAMUEL  PROVOOST,  Pres't. 

In  General  Convention, 
At   Wilmington,  in  the  State  of  Delaware, 
October  ntk.  1786. 


No.  12.     Page  140. 

A   Letter  from    Granville   Sharp,   Esq.,    to   Dr.   Benjamin 
Franklin,  with  Extracts  of  Letters. 

Extract  of  a  Letter  from  Granville  Sharp  to  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, dated  \$th  September,    1785. 

"  All  these  circumstances  prove  that  the  present  time  is 
very  important  and  critical  for  the  promotion  of  the  inter- 
ests and  future  extension  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Amer- 
ica, and  that  no  time  should  be  lost  in  obtaining  authority 
for  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  England  to  dispense  with 
the  oaths  of  allegiance  in  the  consecration  of  bishops  for  for- 
eign Churches,  that  they  may  be  restored  to  their  unques- 
tionable right  as  Christian  bishops  to  extend  the  Episcopal 
Church  of  Christ  all  over  the  world." 

"An  immediate  interference  is  become  the  more  neces- 
sary, not  only  on  account  of  the  pretensions  of  Dr.  Seabury, 
and  the  nonjuring  bishops  of  Scotland  (to  which,  however, 
I  hope  my  letters  will  have  given  a  timely  check),  but  also 
to  guard  against  the  presumption  of  Mr.  Wesley  and  other 
Methodists;  who,  it  seems,  have  sent  over  some  persons  un- 
der the  name  of  superintendents,  with  an  assumed  author- 
ity to  ordain  priests,  as  if  they  were  really  invested  with 
Episcopal  authority." 


APPENDIX.  371 

"Some  accounts  of  this  were  read  to  the  Society  for 
the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  May  last,  from  the  letters 
of  their  missionaries;  and  I  have  since  heard  that  some 
Methodistical  clergymen  have  procured  consecration  from 
the  Moravian  CJmrches,  which  the  latter  had  received  from 
the  bishops  of  Poland.  These  attempts  of  the  sectaries 
prove,  however,  that  they  perceive  among  the  Americans 
an  increasing  inclination  towards  Episcopal  government,  of 
which  they  want  to  take  an  undue  advantage;  and  conse- 
quently they  prove,  also,  that  the  exertions  of  every  sincere 
friend  to  the  Church  of  England  are  peculiarly  necessary  at 
this  time  to  counteract  them,  and  to  facilitate  the  commu- 
nication of  a  pure  and  irreprehensible  Episcopacy  to  Amer- 
ica, by  removing  the  obstacles  which  at  present  restrain 
the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  England,  from  extending 
the  Church  of  England  beyond  the  bounds  of  English 
government" 

"  I  should  also  inform  your  Grace,  that  America  is  not 
the  only  part  wherein  Protestant  Episcopacy  is  likely  to  be 
extended,  when  the  rights  of  election  are  better  understood: 
for  had  I  been  prepared,  in  the  year  1767,  on  this  point,  as 
I  am  at  present,  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  a  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  would  have  been  promoted  in  Holland, 
and  in  several  parts  of  Germany  and  Switzerland,  long  be- 
fore this  time." 

• 

"  How  I  happened  to  be  concerned  in  so  important  an 
affair  (if  your  Grace  should  have  leisure  and  curiosity  to  be 
informed),  I  am  ready  to  communicate  on  receiving  your 
commands,"  etc. 


Extract  of  a  Letter  from  Granville  Sharp  to  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, dated  \"]th  of  February,    1786. 

"  Since  I  had  the  honor  of  speaking  to  your  Grace  on 
this  subject,  I  have  perused  Dr.  Smith's  sermon,  which  was 
preached  before  the  convention  at  Philadelphia;  and  though 


372  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

I  have  still  great  fears  about  the  propriety  of  the  alterations 
they  have  made  in  the  Liturgy,  yet  there  seems  to  be  some 
ground  to  hope  that  they  will  be  able  to  assign  a  reason- 
able excuse  for  the  changes,  without  giving  occasion  to 
suspect  any  want  of  belief  in  the  several  articles  which 
they  have  omitted;  for  Dr.  Smith  plainly  insinuates,  that 
they  proceeded  on  the  model  of  the  alterations  that  were 
proposed  to  the  English  convocation  in  jjSSp;  for  which, 
several  circumstances  have  induced  me  to  entertain  a  fa- 
vorable opinion.  In  looking  over  the  MS.  account  of  Arch- 
bishop Sharp's  life,  I  find  that  he  was  one  of  the  King's 
commissioners  for  that  business,  and  took  infinite  pains 
therein,  being  sensible  that  some  alterations  might  be  made 
with  advantage.  He  was  also  the  person  who  first  pro- 
posed, in  convocation,  that  Dr.  Tillotson  should  be  ap- 
pointed prolocutor,  in  order  to  favor  the  intended  altera- 
tions. Dr.  Nichols  has  given  a  short  general  account  of 
that  business  in  his  '  Apparatus  ad  Defcnsionem  Ecclesia 
Anglican<z\'  but  I  never  heard  that  the  transactions  at 
length  were  ever  printed;  and  therefore  am  surprised  to 
find  that  the  convention  at  Philadelphia  had  a  full  account 
of  that  important  business  before  them  for  their  guidance. 
Dr.  Nichols  highly  commends  the  alterations  that  were 
then  intended,  and  few  men  were  better  qualified  to  be 
competent  judges  of  that  matter.  If  these  circumstances 
be  duly  considered,  there  seems  room  to  discriminate  be- 
tween the  motives  which  might  induce  the  convention  at 
Philadelphia  to  make  such  large  substractions  from  our  Lit- 
urgy, and  the  real  propriety  or  impropriety  of  those  sub- 
stractions, at  least  so  far  that  the  latter  need  not  be  held 
forth  as  a  ground  of  objection  against  the  candidates  for 
consecration,  if  in  other  respects  the  candidates  themselves 
should  be  found  unexceptionable,  and  should  readily  profess 
a  sound  and  unequivocal  belief  in  the  fundamental  articles 
of  our  faith;  for  this  will  surely  justify  their  consecration 
before  God  and  man;  and  more  especially  if  they  will 
previously  engage  and  promise,  that  when  they  have  re- 


APPENDIX.  373 

ceived  authority,  they  will  not  lay  hands  on  any  man  except 
on  the  like  Christian  conditions,  independent  of  all  national 
forms  and  rituals  of  mere  human  authority,  which  can  not 
annul  the  necessity  of  maintaining  an  orthodox  ministry 
in  Christ's  Episcopal  Church,  howsoever  the  governments 
under  which  they  live,  should  think  proper  to  model  the 
public  forms  of  worship  for  their  respective  jurisdictions. 
And  therefore  I  beg  leave  humbly  to  submit  to  your  Grace, 
that  if  any  notice  is  to  be  taken  of  the  late  rejection  of 
creeds  from  the  Liturgy  in  your  Grace's  intended  answer  to 
the  American  requisition,  whether,  instead  of  stating  that 
measure  as  a  just  cause  of  refusal,  it  may  not  be  more  ad- 
visable to  mention  it  rather  as  a  just  cause  for  your  exhort- 
ing and  giving  them  timely  warning  NOT  to  send  over  any 
candidates  for  consecration,  but  such  as  are  known  to  profess 
a  sound  belief  in  the  fundamental  articles  of  the  Christian 
faitJi?  and  more  particularly  in  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of 
the  Holy  Trinity,  and  in  the  real  personality  and  actual 
agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  the  Divine  Comforter  and  In- 
structor to  the  end  of  the  world?  For  these  necessary 
articles  of  faith  are  not  more  perverted  by  the  Socinians, 
than  by  a  sect  professing  principles  diametrically  opposite 
to  them,  I  mean  the  modern  Mysticks,  who  assert  that 
Christ  is  the  only  God;  though  the  effect  of  these  very 
opposite  tenets  is  precisely  the  same,  viz.,  that  both  sects 
are  led  to  deny  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  and 
therefore,  by  what  spirit  they  are  so  led,  we  may  fairly 
judge  by  the  fruits.  Some  Americans  have  lately  adopted 
these  strange  notions,  which  is  the  reason  of  my  mention- 
ing them,"  etc. 


Letter  to  Dr.  Franklin. 

OLD  JEWRY,  LONDON,  AUGUST  19,  1786. 

DEAR  SIR, 

Nothing  could  have  been  more  truly  acceptable  to  me 
than  your  Excellency's  obliging  present  of  the  new  Amer- 


374  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

ican  Prayer  Book;  and  the  more  especially  as  I  had  the 
happiness  of  finding  that  the  convention  have  retained,  in 
the  Litany  and  other  prayers,  as  well  as  in  the  Articles  of 
Religion,  an  ample  testimony  to  the  most  essential  doc- 
trines of  the  Church  of  England,  and  that  they  have  really 
proceeded  upon  the  plan  laid  down  by  the  King's  commis- 
sioners in  1689,  of  whom  my  own  grandfather  (afterwards 
Archbishop  Sharp)  was  one,  who  took  a  very  active  part 
in  that  business,  though  he  is  not  mentioned  in  ifre  preface 
of  the  new  Prayer  Book.  This  I  discovered  by  a  MS.  ac- 
count of  my  grandfather's  life,  much  about  the  time  that 
many  vague  reports  were  current  here,  of  immoderate  and 
unjustifiable  changes  made  in  the  Liturgy  by  the  American 
Convention;  for  the  Socinians  flattered  themselves  (through 
a  mere  mistake  of  Dr.  Price,  in  a  note  which  he  had  added 
to  Dr.  Rush's  letter  of  October  25,  1785,  as  published  in 
the  newspapers)  that  the  proceedings  of  the  convention 
had  been  "similar"  to  those  of  one  Episcopal  congregation 
at  Boston,  which  adopted  a  liturgy — "formed  after  the  man- 
ner of  Dr.  Clarke  and  Mr,  Lindsey."  These  reports  would 
have  given  me  much  more  uneasiness,  if  the  perusal  of  Dr. 
Smith's  sermon  (preached  before  the  convention)  had  not 
induced  me  to  hope  that  the  plan  of  the  year  1689  would 
really  be  adopted  by  the  convention  as  a  model  of  proceed- 
ing; and  I  was  well  satisfied  that  the  said  plan  was  suffi- 
ciently orthodox,  because  I  was  confident,  that  if  it  had 
been  otherwise,  my  grandfather  would  not  have  endeavored 
to  promote  it.  Nevertheless,  the  reports  of  Socinianism 
gave  great  offence  to  many  worthy  people  here,  and  more 
especially  to  the  bishops,  who  had  been  sincerely  disposed 
to  promote  the  Church  of  America,  as  declared  in  my  for- 
mer letters;  but  on  hearing  of  the  confident  reports  of  the 
Socinians,  they  seemed  to  give  up  all  hopes  of  being  able 
to  hold  any  communication  with  the  convention.  In  this 
state  of  the  business,  I  thought  it  my  duty  to  explain  in 
writing  to  our  worthy  primate,  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, my  reasons  for  hoping  that  the  convention  would  be 


APPENDIX.  375 

able  to  assign  such  a  reasonable  excuse  for  the  changes  they 
were  reported  to  have  made,  as  might  be  sufficient  to  re- 
move that  ground  of  objection  against  the  candidates  for  con- 
secration, if,  in  other  respects,  the  candidates  themselves 
were  found  unexceptionable.  An  extract  from  that  letter  I 
have  enclosed  for  your  Excellency's  perusal,  dated  Febru- 
ary 17,  last;  and  I  earnestly  entreated  that  the  bishops  here 
might,  at  least,  be  prepared  with  authority  to  dispense  with 
the  oaths  in  giving  consecration,  a  point  which  I  had  also 
previously  solicited  in  a  letter  dated  September  13,  1785. 
As  the  convention  transmitted  no  account  of  their  transac- 
tions, when  they  wrote  to  the  two  archbishops,  there  was 
no  sufficient  evidence  for  a  direct  confutation  of  the  reports 
respecting  Socinianism\  and  therefore  the  great  caution  and 
reserve  expressed  in  the  joint  answer  of  the  archbishops, 
was  unquestionably  right  and  perfectly  necessary,  under 
such  a  state'  of  uncertainty  respecting'  Christian  doctrine  ! 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  with  his  usual  conde- 
scension and  politeness,  was  pleased  to  communicate  to 
me,  very  lately,  the  contents  of  that  letter,  as  also  the  pro- 
posed forms  of  testimonials  which  it  enclosed:  and  howso- 
ever these  may  be  received  by  the  convention,  I  am  bound 
to  acknowledge  my  hearty  approbation  of  them,  being  thor- 
oughly convinced  that  they  were  dictated  by  the  most  un- 
affected sincerity  of  heart,  and  (I  may  even  say) .apostolical 
concern  for  the  promotion  of  the  true  Catholic  Church  in 
America. 

Nevertheless,  the  archbishops  have  not  yet  received  any 
acknowledgment  that  their  letter  has  reached  America, 
except  the  short  mention  of  it  in  your  Excellency's  obliging 
letter  to  me.  Had  the  gentlemen  deputed  by  the  conven- 
tion to  correspond  with  the  archbishops,  thought  proper  to 
send  them  a  short  general  description  of  the  new  Liturgy, 
with  some  account  also  of  the  plan  upon  which  it  was 
formed,  they  would  have  prevented  the  apprehensions  and 
suspicions  occasioned  by  the  late  reports  about  Socinianism, 
against  which  the  Liturgy  itself  bears  ample  testimony.  I 


376  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

had  hoped,  however,  that  nothing  would  have  been  omitted 
therein  but  the  too  frequent  repetitions  of  our  Liturgy:  and 
that  if  more  creeds  than  one  had  been  considered  as  falling 
under  the  same  head  of  correction,  that,  at  least  the  Nicene 
Creed  might  have  been  appointed  to  be  used  instead  of  the 
common  creed,  on  some  particular  festivals,  as  Christmas- 
day,  or  Trinity  Sunday,  with  a  discretionary  power  in  the 
minister  to  use  occasionally  the  Athanasian  Creed,  as  all 
these  creeds  may  equally  be  proved  by  unquestionable  testi- 
monies of  Scripture.  Nevertheless,  the  resolution  expressed 
in  the  preface,  that  they  do  not  mean  to  separate  from  the 
Church  of  England  in  principles,  together  with  the  unequiv- 
ocal declarations  still  retained  in  the  new  Liturgy,  of  the 
indispensable  faith  and  worship  due  to  the  thrte  Divine  Per- 
sons (whose  existence  in  the  one  divine  nature  or  Godhead  is 
so  clearly  revealed  in  Scripture,  and  into  whose  religious 
service  we  are  equally  enlisted  by  the  baptismal  profession 
and  vows  being  made  expressly  in  the  names  of  all  the 
three},  must  undoubtedly  give  sincere  satisfaction  to  all 
true  Christians,  notwithstanding  the  omission  of  several 
other  things  which  they  would  wish  to  have  been  also 
retained.  And,  therefore,  from  my  confidence  of  the  un- 
exceptionable religious  character  of  the  English  bishops  in 
general  (without  waiting  to  hear  their  sentiments  declared 
by  themselves,)  I  may  venture  to  repeat  what  I  asserted  in 
my  former  letters,  that  the  bishops  of  England  will  be  still 
sincerely  inclined  to  promote  the  welfare  of  the  Episcopal 
Churches  in  America,  and  to  maintain  an  affectionate  com- 
munication with  them  as  sister  Churches,  provided  that  the 
gentlemen  elected  to  be  sent  for  consecration  are  really  in 
themselves  unexceptionable:  and  I  have  the  satisfaction  to 
inform  your  Excellency,  that  the  archbishops  have  already 
prepared  themselves,  to  comply  with  the  requisition  of  the 
American  Churches,  by  obtaining  an  act  of  parliament  in 
the  last  session,  to  remove  the  former  difficulty  about  the 
oaths,  a  copy  of  which  is  enclosed.  The  late  accounts 
in  the  public  papers,  that  the  Episcopal  Churches  of  Vir- 


APPENDIX.  377 

ginia  and  New  York  had  elected  candidates  for  the  Epis- 
copal office  in  their  respective  provinces,  gave  me  very 
particular  satisfaction,  because  I  had  understood  from  for- 
mer accounts,  that  the  General  Convention  had  nominated 
the  candidates;  which  would  have  been  a  dangerous  pre- 
cedent of  infringement  on  the  ancient  rights  of  the  clergy 
and  people  in  each  province  respectively,  to  elect  their  own 
bishops;  and  I  should  have  had  still  much  more  sincere 
satisfaction,  if  these  two  provinces  had  adopted  the  apos- 
tolical mode  of  electing  two  unexceptionable  candidates  for 
each  see,  whose  acceptance  should  be  determined  by  lot,  as 
revived  by  the  Spanish  bishops  in  the  council  of  Barcelona 
(see  my  tract  on  Congregational  Courts,  p.  89,  90),  but 
perhaps,  upon  the  whole,  it  may  be  more  prudent  to  defer 
the  decision  of  the  lot,  until  three  or  four  bishops  are 
actually  resident  in  America;  who  can  then  more  effect- 
ually examine  (as  their  apostolical  duty  requires)  the  qual- 
ifications and  characters  of  the  elected  candidates,  by 
•calling  upon  the  people,  publicly,  for  information  whether 
any  just  exceptions  are  known,  before  the  lot  is  cast,  be- 
cause even  a  legal  exception  would  seem  to  be  made  too 
late,  if  discovered  after  the  solemn  appeal  to  divine  Provi- 
dence by  lot  and  previous  prayer;  for  in  such  a  case  there 
seems  to  be  no  alternative:  nothing  but  an  humble  submis- 
sion and  reliance  on  the  same  Providence,  for  all  the  future 
consequences  of  the  decision,  whatever  they  may  be;  unless 
some  subsequent  misconduct  should  render  the  interference 
of  the  other  bishops  necessary. 

I  send  herewith  a  duplicate  of  my  letter  respecting  a 
paper  currency  not  liable  to  depreciation,  which  was  sent  by 
the  Mediator,  Captain  Kennydy;  and  I  remain  with  true 
respect  and  esteem,  dear  sir, 

Your  Excellency's  most  obliged, 
Humble  servant, 

GRANVILLE  SHARP. 

His  Excellency  Benjamin  Franklin,  Esq., 
President  of  the  State  of  Pennsylvania. 


378  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH, 

No.  13.     Page  141. 

An  act  of  the  General  Convention  of  Clerical  and  Lay  De- 
puties of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  States 

'i<-\^of  New  York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  and 
South  Carolina,  held  at  Wilmington,  in  the  State  of  Dela- 
ware, on  Wednesday,  the  \\tli  of  October,  1786. 

Whereas,  at  a  General  Convention  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  sundry  of 
the  United  States  of  America,  viz.,  New  York,  New  Jersey 
Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and  South 
Carolina,  holden  at  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  on  the  Tues- 
day before  the  feast  of  St.  Michael,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
1785,  and  divers  subsequent  days,  it  was  agreed  and  de- 
clared, that  "the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Adminis- 
tration of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies 
of  the  Church,  according  to  the  use  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land," should  be  continued  to  be  used  by  this  Church,  as 
the  same  was  altered  by  the  said  convention,  in  a  certain 
instrument  of  writing,  passed  by  their  authority,  entitled, 
"Alterations  of  the  Liturgy  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  in  order  to  render 
the  same  conformable  to  the  American  Revolution  and  the 
Constitutions  of  the  respective  States: "  And  it  was  further 
agreed  and  declared,  that  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and 
Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and 
Ceremonies  of  the  Church,  according  to  the  use  of  the 
Church  of  England,  as  altered  by  an  instrument  of  writing, 
passed  under  the  authority  of  the  aforesaid  convention, 
entitled,  "  Alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and 
Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and 
Ceremonies  of  the  Church,  according  to  the  use  of  the 
Church  of  England,  proposed  and  recommended  to  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica, should  be  used  in  this  Church,  when  the^  same  should 
have  been  ratified  by  the  conventions  which  had  respectively 


APPENDIX.  379 

/sent  deputies  to  the  said  General  Convention:" — And 
thereupon  the  said  convention,  anxious  to  complete  their 
Episcopal  system  by  means  of  the  Church  of  England,  did 
transcribe  and  transmit  an  address  to  the  most  reverend 
and  right  reverend  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 
York,  and  the  bishops  of  the  Church  of  England,  earnestly 
entreating  that  venerable  body  to  confer  the  Episcopal 
character  on  such  persons  as  should  be  recommended  by 
this  Church,  in  the  several  states  so  represented. 

And  whereas  the  clerical  and  lay  deputies  of  this  Church 
have  received  the  most  friendly  and  affectionate  letters  in 
answer  to  the  said  address,  from  the  said  archbishops  and 
bishops,  opening  a  fair  prospect  of  the  success  of  their  said 
applications;  but,  at  the  same  time,  earnestly  exhorting  this 
convention  to  use  their  utmost  exertions  for  the  removal  of  | 
certain  objections  by  them  made,  against  some  parts  of  the 
alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Rites  and 
Ceremonies  of  this  Church,  last  mentioned:  In  pursuance 
whereof,  this  present  General  Convention  hath  been  called, 
and  is  now  assembled;  and  being  sincerely  disposed  to  give 
every  satisfaction  to  their  Lordships,  which  will  be  consistent 
with  the  union  and  general  content  of  the  Church  they  rep- 
resent; and  declaring  their  steadfast  resolution  to  main- 
tain the  same  essential  articles  of  faith  and  discipline  with 
the  Church  of  England: 

Now  therefore,  the  said  deputies  do  hereby  determine  and 
declare, 

First,  That  in  the  creed  commonly  called  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  these  words — "  He  descended  into  hell,"  shall  be 
and  continue  a  part  of  that  creed. 

Secondly,  That  the  Nicene  Creed  shall  also  be  inserted 
in  the  said  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  immediately  after  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  prefaced  with  the  rubric  [or  this\. 

And  whereas,  In  consequence  of  the  objections  expressed 
by  their  Lordships  to  the  alterations  in  the  Book  of  Com- 
nron  Prayer,  last  mentioned,  the  conventions  in  some  of  the 
states,  represented  in  this  General  Convention,  have  sus- 


380  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

pended  the  ratification  and  use  of  the  said  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  by  reason  whereof  it  will  be  improper  that 
persons  to  be  consecrated  or  ordained  as  bishops,  priests, 
or  deacons,  respectively,  should  subscribe  the  declaration 
contained  in  the  Tenth  Article  of  the  general  ecclesiastical 
constitution,  without  some  modification. 

Therefore,  it  is  hereby  determined  and  declared, 
Thirdly,  That  the  second  clause  so  to  be  subscribed  by  a 
bishop,  priest,  or  deacon  of  this  Church,  in  any  of  the  states 
which  have  not  already  ratified  or  used  the  last  mentioned 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  shall  be  in  the  words  following — 
"  And  I  do  solemnly  engage  to  conform  to  the  doctrine  and 
worship  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  according  to 
the  use  of  the  Church  of  England,  as  the  same  is  altered  by 
the  General  Convention,  in  a  certain  instrument  of  writing, 
passed  by  their  authority,  entitled,  Alterations  of  the  Liturgy 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Cliurch  in  the  United  States  of 
America,  in  order  to  render  the  same  conformable  to  the 
A  merican  Revolution,  and  the  Constitutions  of  the  respective' 
States,  until  the  new  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  recom- 
mended by  the  General  Convention,  shall  be  ratified  or 
used  in  the  state  in  which  I  am  (bishop,  priest,  or  deacon, 
as  the  case  may  be),  by  the  authority  of  the  convention 
thereof.  And  I  do  further  solemnly  engage,  that  when  the 
said  new  Book  of  Common  Prayer  shall  be  ratified  or  used 
by  the  authority  of  the  convention  in  the  state  for  which  I 
am  consecrated  a  bishop  (or  ordained  a  priest  or  deacon),  I 
will  conform  to  the  doctrines  and  worship  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  as  settled  and  determined  in  the  last 
mentioned  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Administration 
of  the  Sacraments,  set  forth  by  the  General  Convention 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopar  Church  in  the  United  States." 
And  it  is  hereby  further  determined  and  declared, 
That  these  words  in  the  preface  to  the  new  proposed 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  viz.,  "In  the  creed  commonly 
called  the  Apostles'  Creed,  one  clause  is  omitted,  as  being 
of  uncertain  meaning;  and  "—together  with  the  note  re- 


APPENDIX.  381 

ferred  to  in  that  place,  be,  from  henceforth,  no  part  of  the 
preface  to  the  said  proposed  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
And  it  is  hereby  further  determined  and  declared, 
That  the  Fourth  Article  of  religion  in  the  new  proposed 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  be  altered,  to  render  it  conforma- 
ble to  the  adoption  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  as  follows,  "  of  the 
creeds.     The  two  creeds,  namely,  that  commonly  called  the 
Apostles'  Creed  and  the  Nicene   Creed,  ought  to  be  re- 
ceived and  believed,  because  they,"  etc.,  etc. 
Done  in  General  Convention,  at  Wilmington,  in  the  State  of 
Delaware,  the  day  and  year  first  aforesaid. 


No.  14.     Page  160. 

To  all  Persons  to  whom  these  Presents  shall  come,  or  whom 
the  same  shall  or  may  in  any  wise  or  at  any  time  concern, 
we,  John,  by  Divine  Providence,  Lord  Archbishop  cf  Can- 
terbury, Primate  of  all  England,  and  Metropolitan,  send 
greeting: — 

Whereas,  by  an  act  of  parliament,  passed  at  Westmin- 
ster, in  the  twenty-sixth  year  of  the  reign  of  our  sovereign 
Lord  George  the  Third,  King  of  Great  Britain,  France,  and 
Ireland,  entitled,  "An  Act  to  empower  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  or  the  Archbishop  of  York,  for  the  time  being, 
to  Consecrate  to  the  Office  of  a  Bishop,  Persons  being  Sub- 
jects or  Citizens  of  Countries  out  of  his  Majesty's  Domin- 
ions," it  is  enacted,  that  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  to  and 
for  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  or  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  for  the  time  being,  together  with  such  other  bishops 
as  they  shall  call  to  their  assistance,  to  consecrate  persons, 
being  subjects  or  citizens  of  countries  out  of  his  Majesty's 
dominions,  bishops,  for  the  purposes  aforesaid,  without  the 
King's  license  for  their  election,  or  the  royal  mandate  under 
the  great  seal  for  their  confirmation  and  consecration,  and 
without  requiring  them  to  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and 
supremacy,  and  the  oath  of  due  obedience  to  the  archbishop 


382  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

for  the  time  being.  Provided  always,  that  no  persons  shall 
be  consecrated  bishops  in  the  manner  herein  provided,  until 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
for  the  time  being,  shall  have  first  applied  for,  and  obtained 
his  Majesty's  license,  by  warrant  under  his  royal  signet  and 
sign  manual,  authorizing  and  empowering  him  to  perform 
such  consecration,  and  expressing  the  name  or  names  of 
the  persons  so  to  be  consecrated;  nor  until  the  said  Arch- 
bishop has  been  fully  ascertained  of  their  sufficiency  in  good 
learning,  of  the  soundness  of  their  faith,  and  of  the  purity 
of  their  manners.  Provided  also,  and  be  it  hereby  declared, 
that  no  person  or  persons  consecrated  to  the  office  of  a 
bishop  in  the  manner  aforesaid,  nor  any  person  or  persons 
deriving  their  consecration  from  or  under  any  bishop  so 
consecrated,  nor  any  person  or  persons  admitted  to  the 
order  of  deacon  or  priest  by  any  bishop  or  bishops  so  con- 
secrated, or  by  the  successor  or  successors  of  any  bishop 
or  bishops  so  consecrated,  shall  be  thereby  enabled  to  exer-  J 
cise  his  or  their  respective  office  or  offices  within  Jiis  / 
Majesty's  dominions.  Provided  always,  and  be  it  further 
enacted,  that  a  certificate,  of  such  consecration  shall  be 
given  under  the  hand  and  seal  of  the  archbishop  who 
consecrates,  containing  the  name  of  the  person  so  conse- 
crated, with  the  addition  as  well  of  the  country  whereof  he 
is  a  subject  or  citizen,  as  of  the  Church  in  which  he  is  ap- 
pointed bishop,  and  the  further  description  of  his  not  having 
taken  the  said  oaths,  being  exempted  from  the  obligation 
of  so  doing  by  virtue  of  this  act. — Now,  know  all  men  by 
these  presents,  that  we,  the  said  John,  Lord  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  having  obtained  his  Majesty's  license,  by  war- 
rant under  his  royal  signet  and  sign  manual,  did,  in  pur- 
suance of  the  said  act  of  parliament,  on  Sunday,  the  fourth 
day  of  February,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  seven 
hundred  and  eighty-seven,  in  the  chapel  of  our  palace,  at 
.  Lambeth,  in  the  County  of  Surry,  admit  our  beloved  in 
Christ,  William  White,  clerk,  D.D.,  a  subject  or  citizen  of 
the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  in  North  America,  and  rector  of 


APPENDIX.  383 

Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's,  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  in 
the  said  state,  of  whose  sufficiency  in  good  learning,  sound- 
ness in  the  faith,  and  purity  of  manners,  we  were  fully  as- 
certained, into  the  office  of  a  bishop  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church,  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  aforesaid,  to 
which  the  said  William  White  hath  been  elected  by  the 
convention  for  the  said  state,  as  appears  unto  us  by  due 
testimony  thereof  by  him  produced;  and  him,  the  said  Wil- 
liam White,  did  then  and  there  rightly  and  canonically  con- 
secrate a  bishop,  according  to  the  manner  and  form  pre- 
scribed and  used  by  the  Church  of  England,  his  taking  the 
oaths  of  allegiance,  supremacy,  and  canonical  obedience 
only  excepted,  he  being  exempted  from  the  obligation 
of  taking  the  said  oaths  by  virtue  of  the  above  recited  act. 
Provided,  that  neither  he,  the  said  bishop,  nor  any  person 
or  persons  deriving  their  consecration  from  or  under  him, 
nor  any  person  or  persons  admitted  to  the  order  of  deacon 
or  priest  by  him,  or  his  successor  or  successors,  shall  be 
enabled  to  exercise  his  or  their  respective  office  or  offices 
within  his  Majesty's  dominions.  In  testimony  whereof,  we 
have  caused  our  archiepiscopal  seal  to  be  affixed  to  these 
presents.  Given  at  Lambeth  House,  the  day  and  year 
above  written,  and  in  the  fourth  year  of  our  translation. 

J.  (L.  S.)  CANTUAR. 

We,  William,  Lord  Archbishop  of  York,  Charles,  Lord 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  John,  Lord  Bishop  of  Peter- 
borough, were  present  and  assisting  at  the  consecration 
within  mentioned. 

W.  EBOR, 

C.  BATH  &  WELLS, 

J.  PETERBOROUGH. 

The  signatures  of  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 
York,  and  of  the  bishops  of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  Peter- 
borough, were  made  in  my  presence,  February  4th,  1787. 
(Copy.)  W.  DICKES, 

Secretary  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 


384  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

On  Sunday  the  fourth  day  of  February,  in  the  year  of 
our  Lord  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty-seven, 
and  in  the  fourth  year  of  the  translation  of  the  most  rever- 
end father  in  God,  John,  by  divine  Providence,  Lord  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  primate  of  all  England,  and  metro- 
politan, in  the  chapel  at  the  palace  at  Lambeth,  in  the 
County  of  Surry,  the  said  most  reverend  father  in  God,  by 
virtue  and  authority  of  a  certain  license  or  warrant  from 
his  most  gracious  Majesty,  and  our  sovereign  Lord  George 
the  Third,  by  the  grace  of  God,  of  Great  Britain,  France, 
and  Ireland,  King,  defender  of  the  faith,  and  so  forth,  to 
him,  in  this  behalf,  directed  the  most  reverend  father  in 
God,  William  by  the  same  Providence,  Lord  Archbishop  of 
York,  primate  of  England,  and  metropolitan,  and  the  right 
reverend  fathers  in  God,  Charles,  by  divine  permission, 
Lord  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  John,  by  divine  per- 
mission, Lord  Bishop  of  Peterborough,  assisting  him,  con- 
secrated the  reverend  William  White,  doctor  in  divinity, 
rector  of  Christ  Church  and  St.  Peter's,  in  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  a  subject  or  citizen  of  the  United  States  of 
North  America,  and  the  reverend  Samuel  Provoost,  doctor 
in  divinity,  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  in  the  City  of  New 
York,  a  subject  or  citizen  also  of  the  United  States  of 
North  America,  to  the  office  of  a  bishop,  respectively,  the 
rites,  circumstances,  and  ceremonies  anciently  used  in  the 
Church  of  England  being  observed  and  applied,  according 
to  the  tenor  of  an  act  passed  in  the  twenty-sixth  year  of 
the  reign  of  his  said  Majesty,  entitled,  "An  Act  to  em- 
power the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  for  the  Time  being,  to  Consecrate  to  the  Office  of  a 
Bishop,  Persons  being  Subjects  or  Citizens  of  Countries 
out  of  his  Majesty's  Dominions,"  in  the  presence  of  me, 
Robert  Jenncr,  notary  public,  one  of  the  deputy  registers 
of  the  province  of  Canterbury,  being  then  and  there  pres- 
ent, the  reverend  and  worshipful  William  Backhouse,  doc- 
tor in  divinity,  Archdeacon  of  Canterbury,  the  Rev.  - 
Lort,  doctor  in  divinity,  the  Rev.  -  -  Drake,  doctor  in 


APPENDIX.  385 

divinity,  William  Dickes,  Esquire,  notary  public,  secretary 
to  his  Grace  the  said  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  with  A  / 
many  others  in  great  numbers  then  and  there  assembled. 
Which  I  attest.  SX^.Y&r* 

(Copy.)  RT.  JENNER, 

Notary  Public,  actuary  assumed. 

And  we,  the  underwritten  notaries  public,  by  royal  au- 
thority duly  admitted  and  sworn,  residing  in  Doctor's  Com- 
mons, London,  do  hereby  certify  and  attest  to  all  whom  it 
may  concern,  that  Robert  Jenner,  whose  name  is  sub- 
scribed to  the  aforegoing  act,  was  and  is  a  notary  public, 
and  one  of  the  deputy  registers  of  the  province  of  Canter- 
bury, and  that  the  letters,  name  and  words,  "  Rt.  Jenner, 
notary  public,"  thereto  subscribed,  were  and  are  of  the 
proper  handwriting  and  subscription  of  the  said  Robert 
Jenner,  and  that  we  saw  him  sign  the  same,  and  that  full 
faith  and  entire  credit  is  and  ought  to  be  given  to  all  the 
acts,  subscriptions,  and  attestations  of  the  said  Robert 
Jenner,  as  well  in  judgment  as  out.  In  testimony  whereof, 
we  have  hereunto  subscribed  our  names,  to  serve  and  avail 
as  occasion  may  require  at  Doctor's  Commons,  London, 
this  fifth  day  of  February,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty -seven.  Which  we 
attest. 

EDWARD   COOPER, 

Notary  Public. 

(Copy.)  WILLIAM   ABBOT, 

Notary  Public. 


386  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

No.    15.     Page   160. 
Note  of  the  Archbishop. 

The  Archbishop  desires  to  have  the  proper  direction  for 
a  letter  to  Bishop  White  at  Falmouth;  where,  if  he  can 
find  time,  he  means  to  send  a  letter  to  Dr.  Chandler.  If 
he  should  not  be  able  to  write  to  Dr.  Chandler,  he  begs  the 
Bishop  to  assure  him  of  his  affectionate  esteem  and  regard, 
and  his  hearty  prayers  for  his  better  health.  He  wishes, 
also  for  such  a  direction,  as  will  be  most  proper  for  a  letter, 
should  occasion  call  for  one,  to  the  bishop  in  Philadelphia. 

It  is  proper  that  the  bishops  should  be  informed,  that  the 
archbishop  was  mistaken  about  the  consecration  in  the 
province  of  York.  They  have  always  been  attended  by 
two  bishops  with  the  archbishop.* 


No.   1 6.     Page   160. 

I.  From  his  Excellency  Richard  Henry  Lee,  Esq.,  President 
of  Congress,  to  the  Hon.  John  Adams,  Esq.,  Minister  Plen- 
ipotentiary to  tlie  Court  of  Great  Britain.^ 

NEW  YORK,  OCTOBER  24,  1785. 

DEAR  SIR, 

Having  yesterday  written  a  long  letter  to  you,  I  have 
now  only  to  request  your  attention  to  the  following  busi- 
ness, which  is  of  very  great  importance  to  those  whom  it 
concerns;  and  who  form  a  considerable  portion  of  the  citi- 


•  See  ante,  p.  152.     Ed. 

t  In  the  answer  of  Mr.  Adams,  he  calls  Mr.  Lee  "late  president  of  Congress." 
The  presidency  of  the  latter  ended  two  days  after  his  writing  of  the  letter,  as  ap- 
pears from  the  printed  journals  of  the  body,  and  the  circumstance  must  have  been 
known  to  Mr.  Adams.  Therefore,  the  letter  was  written  while  Mr.  Lee  was 
president,  and  must  have  been  designed  to  carry  with  it  the  weight  of  his  official 
character. 


APPENDIX.  387 

zens  of  these  states.  The  representatives  of  those  profess- 
ing the  Church  of  England  system  of  religion,  having  been 
lately  assembled  at  Philadelphia,  where  lay  and  clerical 
de'puties  from  seven  states  were  convened  in  General  Con- 
vention, for  the  purpose,  among  other  things,  of  preserving 
and  maintaining  a  succession  of  divines  in  their  Church,  in 
a  manner  which  they  judge  consonant  to  the  gospel,  and 
no  way  interfering  with  the  religious  or  civil  rights  of 
others,  have  sent  an  address  to  the  archbishops  and  bish- 
ops of  England,  proposing  a  plan  for  the  consecration  of 
American  bishops. — It  is  imagined  that  before  any  thing 
is  done  in  this  business  by  the  bishops  of  England,  they 
will  consult  the  King  and  ministry;  who,  it  is  apprehended, 
may  now,  as  heretofore,  suppose  that  any  step  of  the  kind 
being  taken  in  England,  might  be  considered  here  as  an 
officious  intermeddling  with  our  affairs,  that  would  give 
offence  on  this  side  the  water.  Should  this  be  the  case, 
the  Church  of  England  members  of  Congress  have  the 
greatest  reliance  on  your  liberal  regard  for  the  religious 
rights  of  all  men,  that  you  will  remove  mistaken  scruples 
from  the  mind  of  administration,  by  representing  how  per- 
fectly consonant  it  is  with  our  revolution  principles,  pro- 
fessed throughout  all  these  states,  that  every  denomination 
of  Christians  has  a  right  to  pursue  its-own  religious  modes, 
interfering  not  with  others.  That  instead  of  giving  offence, 
it  must  give  content,  by  evidencing  a  friendly  disposition 
to  accommodate  the  people  here  who  are  members  of  the 
Church  in  question. 

In  proof  of  this,  Congress  did  lately  show  their  attention 
to  the  accommodation  of  this  class  of  Christians,  by  com- 
municating to  the  different  executives  your  information 
from  the  Danish  minister,  of  that  King's  willingness  to  fa- 
cilitate the  business  of  ordination  for  our  Church,  and  the 
assembly  of  Virginia  hath  incorporated  this  society,  under 
which  act  of  incorporation  the  assembly  was  held  in  that 
state  that  sent  both  lay  and  clerical  deputies  to  the  General 
Convention  lately  held  in  Philadelphia. 


388  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  with  sentiments  of  the  truest 
esteem  and  regard,  dear  sir,  your  most  obedient  and  very 
humble  servant, 

RICHARD   HENRY   LEE? 

His  Excellency  John  Adams,  Esq.,  Minister  Plenipotentiary  from  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica to  the  Court  of  London,  at  his  House  in  Grosvenor  Square,  London. 


2.  From  Mr.  Adams  to  Air.  Lee,  in  answer* 

GROSVENOR  SQUARE,  JANUARY  4,  1786. 

DEAR  SIR, 

A  day  or  two  after  the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  Novem- 
ber i,  and  that  of  Mr.  Jay's  which  came  with  it,  I  wrote  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  by  Col.  Smith,  for  an  hour 
when  I  might  have  the  honor  to  pay  my  respects  to  his 
Grace,  and  was  answered  very  politely,  that  he  would  be 
glad  to  have  the  honor  of  seeing  me  next  day,  between 
eleven  and  twelve.  Accordingly  I  went  yesterday,  and  was 
very  agreeably  received,  by  a  venerable  and  a  candid  prel- 
ate, with  whom  I  had  before  only  exchanged  visits  of  cere- 
mony. I  told  his  Grace,  that  at  the  desire  of  two  very 
respectable  characters  in  America,  the  late  President  of  Con- 
gress and  the  present  Secretary  of  State  for  the  department 
of  foreign  affairs,  I  had  the  honor  to  be  the  bearer  to  his 
Grace  of  a  letter  from  a  convention  of  delegates  from  the 
Episcopal  Churches  in  most  of  the  southern  states,  which 
had  been  transmitted  to  me  open,  that  I  might  be  ac- 
quainted with  its  contents.  That  in  this  business,  how- 
ever, I  acted  in  no  official  character,  having  no  instructions 
from  Congress,  nor  indeed  from  the  Convention;  but  I 
thought  it  most  respectful  to  them,  as  well  as  to  his  Grace, 
to  present  the  letter  in  person.  The  Archbishop  answered, 


•  There  is  in  possession  a  copy  of  a  letter  to  John  Jay,  Esq.,  containing  the  same 
in  substance;  it  being  in  answer  to  a  letter  of  that  gentleman,  then  Secretary  of 
State  for  foreign  affairs. 


APPENDIX.  389 

that  all  that  he  could  say  at  present  was,  that  he  was  him- 
self very  well  disposed  to  give  the  satisfaction  desired — for 
that  he  was  by  no  means  one  of  those  who  wished  that  con- 
tention should  be  kept  up  between  the  two  countries,  or  be- 
tween one  party  and  another  in  America — but,  on  the  con- 
trary, was  desirous  of  doing  every  thing  in  his  power  to 
promote  harmony  and  good  humor.  I  then  said,  that  if  his 
Grace  would  take  the  trouble  of  reading  two  letters  from 
Mr.  Lee  and  Mr.  Jay,  he  would  perceive  the  motives  of 
those  gentlemen  in  sending  the  letter  to  my  care.  I  gave 
him  the  letters,  which  he  read  attentively  and  returned, 
and  added,  that  it  was  a  great  satisfaction  to  him  to  see, 
that  gentlemen  of  character  and  reputation  interested  them- 
selves in  it — for  that  the  Episcopalians  in  the  United  States 
could  not  have  the  full  and  complete  enjoyment  of  their  re- 
ligious liberties  without  it — and  he  subjoined,  that  it  was 
also  a  great  satisfaction  to  him,  to  have  received  this  visit 
from  me  upon  this  occasion — and  he  would  take  the  liberty 
to  ask  me,  if  it  were  not  an  improper  question,  whether  the 
interposition  of  the  English  bishops  would  not  give  uneasi-  / 
ness  and  dissatisfaction  in  America  ?  I  replied,  that  my  / 
answer  could  be  only  that  of  a  private  citizen,  and  in  that 
capacity  I  had  no  scruple  to  say  that  the  people  of  the 
United  States  in  general,  were  for  a  liberal  and  generous 
toleration.  I  might  indeed  employ  a  stronger  word,  and 
call  it  a  right,  and  the  first  right  of  mankind,  to  worship 
God  according  to  their  consciences,  and  therefore  that  I 
could  not  see  any  reasonable  ground  for  dissatisfaction,  and 
that  I  hoped  and  believed  that  there  would  be  none  of  any 
consequence. 

His  Grace  was  then  pleased  to  say,  that  religion  in  all 
countries,  especially  a  young  one,  ought  to  be  attended  to, 
as  it  was  the  foundation  of  government.  He  hoped  the 
characters  which  should  be  recommended,  would  be  good 
ones.  I  replied,  that  there  were  in  the  Churches  in  Amer- 
ica, able  men,  of  characters  altogether  irreproachable — and 
that  such  and  such  only,  I  presumed,  would  be  recom- 


390  MEMO7RS  OF   THE    CHURCH. 

mended.  I  then  rose  to  take  my  leave,  and  his  Grace  then 
asked  me,  if  he  might  be  at  liberty  to  mention,  that  I  had 
made  him  this  visit  upon  this  occasion  ?  I  answered,  cer- 
tainly, if  his  Grace  should  judge  it  proper.  Thus,  sir,  I 
have  fulfilled  my  commission,  and  remain,  as  usual,  your 
sincere  friend  and  most  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  ADAMS. 
(A  true  copy.) 

Richard  Henry  Lee. 


3.  Letter  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  Mr.  Adams. 

LAMBETH  HOUSE,  FEBRUARY  27,  1786. 

SIR, 

After  full  communication  with  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
and  the  bishops,  on  the  subject  of  the  address,  which  you 
delivered  to  me  from  the  deputies  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church,  in  convention,  in  Philadelphia,  I  concur  with 
them  in  requesting  the  favor  of  you,  to  forward  our  answer 
to  the  committee  appointed  to  receive  it.  Duplicates  of 
the  answer  accompany  this  letter;  which,  if  sent  by  different 
ships,  we  hope  may  give  a  better  chance  of  the  early  arrival 
of  one  of  them. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be, 

Sir,  your  most  obedient, 
Humble  servant, 

J.  CANTUAR. 


4.  Certificate  of  the  Supreme  Executive  Council  of  Pennsyl- 
vania. 

Pennsylvania,  ss. 

The  supreme  executive  council  of  the  Commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania,  do  hereby  certify  and  make  known  to  all 
whom  it  may  concern,  that  agreeably  to  the  frame  of  gov- 


APPENDIX.  391 

eminent  and  laws  of  this  Commonwealth — the  clergy  and 
others,  members  of  the  Church  of  England  in  Pennsylva- 
nia, are  at  liberty  to  take  such  means  as  they  may  think 
proper,  for  keeping  up  a  succession  of  religious  teachers — 
Provided  only,  that  the  means  they  adopt  for  this  purpose  / 
do  not  induce  a  subjection  to  any  foreign  jurisdiction,  civil  { 
or  ecclesiastical. 

Given  in  council  under  the  hand  of  the  honorable  Charles 
Biddle,  Esquire,  Vice  President,  and  the  seal  of  the 
State,  at  Philadelphia,  this  twenty-fourth  day  of  No- 
vember, in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  seven 
hundred  and  eighty-five,  and  in  the  tenth  year  of  the 
Commonwealth . 

(Attest)  CHARLES  BIDDLE,  V.  P. 

JOHN   ARMSTRONG,  JUR.,   Sec. 


5.  A  Certificate  of  his  Excellency  Patrick  Henry,  Esq.,  Gov- 
ernor of  Virginia* 

By  his  Excellency  Patrick  Henry,  Esq. ,  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth 

of  Virginia. 

It  is  certified  and  made  known  to  all  whom  it  may  con- 
cern— That  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  is  incorpo- 
rated by  an  act  of  the  legislature  of  this  Commonwealth, 
for  that  purpose,  made  and  provided:  that  there  is  no  law 
existing  in  this  Commonwealth,  which  in  any  manner  for- 
bids the  admission  of  bishops,  or  the  exercise  of  their  office: 
on  the  contrary,  by  the  sixteenth  article  of  the  declaration 
of  rights,  it  is  provided  in  the  words  following,  viz., — "That 
religion,  or  the  duty  which  we  owe  to  our  Creator,  and  the 
manner  of  discharging  it,  can  be  directed  only  by  reason 
and  conviction,  not  by  force  or  violence,  and  therefore  all 

*  This  copy  of  the  certificate  of  the  governor  of  Virginia,  was  sent  to  the  author 
by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Griffith,  bishop-elect  of  that  state,  to  be  laid  before  the  convention 
of  October,  1786. 


392  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

men  are  equally  entitled  to  the  free  exercise  of  religion, 
according  to  the  dictates  of  conscience;  and  that  it  is  the 
mutual  duty  of  all,  to  practice  Christian  forbearance,  love, 
and  charity  towards  each  other," — which  said  article  is  now 
in  full  force. 

///  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand,  and 
caused  the  seal  of  the  Commonwealth  to  be  affixed,  at 
Richmond,  this  first  day  of  June,  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty-six,  and 
tenth  of  the  Commonwealth. 

P.  HENRY. 


No.  17.     Page  161. 
From  Richard  Peters,  Esq. 

LONDON,  MARCH  4,  1786. 

GENTLEMEN, 

I  yesterday  waited  on  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who 
received  me  with  great  politeness.  I  delivered  the  parcels 
you  sent  by  me,  but  he  had  previously  received  the  origi- 
nals. He  opened  the  conversation  by  saying,  that  on  receipt 
of  the  address  from  the  convention,  which  was  conceived  in 
terms  that  gave  great  satisfaction,  the  bishops  had  deter- 
mined at  once  to  comply  with  it,  if  the  government  would 
enable  them,  by  passing  a  law  for  the  purpose.  But  hearing 
a  number  of  reports,  which  the  committee  had  not  put  it  in 
their  power  to  clear  up,  by  sending  them  all  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  convention,  they  thought  it  their  duty  to  act  cau- 
tiously, and  restrained  their  desire  to  meet  our  wishes,  till 
they  had  more  full  information  on  the  subject.  He  said 
it  was  unnecessary  to  enter  into  the  various  reports  of  al- 
terations said  to  be  made,  or  intended  by  our  Churches,  for 
he  did  not  give  credit  to  common  reports,  which  are  often 
circulated  without  foundation.  Some  alterations,  however, 
it  appeared,  had  been  made,  and  what  the  rest  were,  could 


APPENDIX.  393 

not  be  told  until  the  whole  was  laid  before  them.  That 
some  alterations  were  necessarily  brought  about  by  the 
change  of  circumstances,  and  were  therefore  proper,  he 
allowed;  but  he  hoped  there  would  be  found  none  which 
rendered  our  Church  substantially  different  from  theirs,  of 
which  he  considered  it  as  a  branch,  and  the  bishops  were 
obliged  to  examine  what  Church  ours  was,  before,  from 
their  source,  they  established  an  Episcopacy  over  a  people, 
who  might  perhaps  hold  tenets  opposite  to  theirs.  He  did 
not  know  or  believe  this  was  the  case  with  respect  to  us, 
but  it  became  them  to  inquire.  He  feared  some  of  our 
business  had  been  done  hastily.  He  showed  me  the  an- 
swer to  the  address,  which  he  said  had  been  sincerely/^ 
by  every  bishop  who  had  signed  it.  He  seemed  very  de- 
sirous of  removing  any  doubts  about  their  firm  intentions 
to  comply  with  our  wishes:  showed  me  the  original  draft 
of  the  answer  in  his  handwriting.  I  observed  there  were 
no  alterations  made  in  it,  and  among  nineteen  bishops, 
who  were  all  that  were  in  town  at  the  meeting  of  par- 
liament, there  was  not  a  dissenting  voice.  He  hoped  so 
unanimous  an  opinion,  must  evidence,  beyond  a  doubt,  the 
great  desire  all  had  to  grant  our  request.  They  all,  from 
the  bottom  of  their  hearts,  wished  our  prosperity,  and 
would  do  all  in  their  power  to  promote  it.  But  before  they 
had  the  necessary  information,  it  would  be  imprudent  in 
them  to  act.  He  said  there  would  be  no  difficulties  with 
government,  and  was  happy  that  all  embarrassments,  with 
respect  to  the  civil  powers  of  the  United  States,  were  re- 
moved by  the  certificates  and  papers  transmitted.  He  had 
spoken  to  the  King,  on  the  receipt  of  the  address,  who 
expressed  great  satisfaction  in  it,  and  was  ready  to  do 
what  was  required  of  him.  That  administration  would  pro- 
mote the  law,  when  it  was  recommended  by  the  bishops  as 
proper.  They  therefore,  being  in  a  responsible  situation, 
must  proceed  with  caution.  He  desired  nothing  he  had 
said,  should  be  thought  calculated  to  throw  difficulties  in 
the  way;  for  there  really  was  no  disposition  of  that  kind  in 


394  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  bishops,  or  members  of  the  government.     He  hoped  < 
our  convention,  at  the  next  meeting,  would  consider  the  ' 
embarrassments  too  many  alterations  would  throw  in  the  \ 
way  of  their  application  here,   and   if  any  of  them  sub-  ' 
stantially  deviated  from  the  doctrines  or  worship  of  this 
Church,  it  would  frustrate  the  views  of  our  Churches,  by  ( 
putting  it  out  of  the  power  of  those  here,  who  have  every  j 
good  disposition  to  serve  us,  to  forward  our  application. 
He  wished  great  care  might  be  taken  of  the  character  of 
those  sent  for  consecration,   as   much   depended   on   this. 
They  should,  however,  commit  themselves  to  our  discretion 
in  this  respect,  and  hoped  they  should  have  no  reason  to 
repent  it.     Hejdec  lined  answering  the  question  I  was  de- 
sired by  Dr.  White  to  put  to  fcim.  respecting  the  validity 
or^cotch_consecrations^  having  first  asked  me  whether  the 
question  came  from  the  convention  ?     I  told  him  it  was  to 
satisfy  private  inquiries,  which  were  made  with  no  view  of 
seeking  consecration   from    that   source.*     I   find   we   can 
have  no  bishop  until  we  let  the  prelates  here  see  what 
Church  we  have  made.     I  think  it  would  be  prudent  in  our 
Church  to  put  off  any  material  alterations  until  we  have 
bishc^rjs__consecrated.     If  we  make  any  substantial  altera- 
tions, they  will  be  carped  at  by  those  who  will  make  the 
bishops  uneasy;  and  to  keep  peace  at  home,  they  will  re- 
fuse to  meddle  abroad,  notwithstanding  their  strong  desire 
to  do  what  we  wish. 

I  am  gentlemen, 

With  much  esteem, 

Your  very  obedient  servant, 

RICHARD  PETERS. 

Rev.  Dr.   White,  Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  Rev.  Mr.  Provoost, 
Hon.  James  Duane,  Samuel  Powell,  Esq. 


*  Notwithstanding  the  prudent  reserve  of  the  Archbishop  at  this  time,  he  is  said 
to  have  given  his  influence  in  favor  of  the  nonjuring  bishops  about  three  years  after- 
wards; when,  on  the  decease  of  the  last  Pretender,  they  began  to  pray  for  the  King 
on  the  throne,  and  some  of  them  came  up  to  London,  to  solicit  the  repeal  of  the 
penal  laws  made  against  them. 


II 


APPENDIX.  395 

P.  S.  Mr.  Adams  has  been  very  attentive  to  the  business 
of  an  address,  with  which  he  waited  on  the  Archbishop, 
who  in  return  waited  on  him  with  the  answer  transmitted. 
I  think  the  committee  should  return  him  their  thanks,  for 
the  part  he  (Mr.  Adams)  has  taken. 

Do  not  publish  the  bishops'  answer,  as  it  will  get  over 
here,  and  be  a  subject  of  newspaper  discussion. 


No.  1 8.     Page  164. 
An  Act  of  the  Clergy  of  Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire. 

The  good  Providence  of  Almighty  God,  the  fountain  of 
all  goodness,  having  lately  blessed  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  by  supplying  it 
with  a  complete  and  entire  ministry,  and  affording  to  many 
of  her  communion  the  benefit  of  the  labors,  advice,  and 
government  of  the  successors  of  the  apostles; 

We,  presbyters  of  said  Church  in  the  States  of  Massa- 
chusetts and  New  Hampshire,  deeply  impressed  with  the 
most  lively  gratitude  to  the  Supreme  Governor  of  the  uni- 
verse, for  His  goodness  in  this  respect,  and  with  the  most 
ardent  love  to  His  Church,  and  concern  for  the  interest  of 
her  sons,  that  they  may  enjoy  all  the  means  that  Christ, 
the  great  Shepherd  and  Bishop  of  souls,  has  instituted  for 
leading  His  followers  into  the  ways  of  truth  and  holiness, 
and  preserving  His  Church  in  the  unity  of  the  Spirit,  and 
the  bond  of  peace;  to  the  end  that  the  people  committed 
to  our  respective  charges  may  enjoy  the  benefit  and  advan- 
tage of  those  offices,  the  administration  of  which  belongs  to 
the  highest  order  of  the  ministry,  and  to  encourage  and 
promote,  as  far  as  in  us  lies,  a  union  of  the  whole  Episco- 
pal Church  in  these  states,  and  to  perfect  and  compact 
this  mystical  body  of  Christ,  do  hereby  nominate,  elect, 
and  appoint,  the  Rev.  Edward  Bass,  a  presbyter  of  said 
Church,  and  rector  of  St.  Paul's,  in  Newburyport,  to  be  our 
bishop;  and  we  do  promise  and  engage  to  receive  him  as 


396  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

such,  when  canonically  consecrated,  and  invested  with  the 
apostolic  office  and  powers,  by  the  right  reverend  the  bishops 
hereafter  named,  and  to  render  him  all  that  canonical  obe- 
dience and  submission,  which,  by  the  laws  of  Christ  and  the 
constitution  of  our  Church,  is  due  to  so  important  an  office. 
And  we  now  address  the  right  reverend  the  bishops  in 
the  States  of  Connecticut,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania, 
praying  their  united  assistance  in  consecrating  our  said 
brother,  and  canonically  investing  him  with  the  apostolic 
office  and  powers.  This  request  we  are  induced  to  make, 
from  a  long  acquaintance  with  him,  and  from  a  perfect 
knowledge  of  his  being  possessed  of  that  love  to  God  and 
benevolence  to  men,  that  piety,  learning,  and  good  morals, 
that  prudence  and  discretion,  requisite  to  so  exalted  a  sta- 
tion, as  well  as  that  personal  respect  and  attachment  of  the 
communion  at  large  in  these  states,  which  will  make  him 
a  valuable  acquisition  to  the  order,  and,  we  trust,  a  rich 
blessing  to  the  Church. 

Done  at  a  meeting  of  the  Presbyters,  whose  names  are  under- 
written, held  at  Salem,  in  the  County  of  Essex,  and  Com- 
momvealth  of  Massachusetts,  the  fourth  day  of  June,  Anno 
Saliifis,  1789. 

SAMUEL   PARKER, 

Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  Boston. 

T.  FITCH   OLIVER, 

Rector  of  St.  Michaels  Church,  Marblehead.        • 

JOHN   COUSENS   OGDEN, 

Rector  of  Queen's  Chapel,  Portsmouth,  New  Hampshire. 

WILLIAM   MONTAGUE, 

Minister  of  Christ  Church,  Boston. 

TILLOTSON   BRUNSON, 

Assistant  Minister  of  Christ  Church,  Boston. 

Resolves  on  the  foregoing. 

1st.  Resolved,  That  a  complete  order  of  bishops,  derived 
as  well  under  the  English  as  the  Scots  line  of  Episcopacy, 
doth  now  subsist  within  the  United  States  of  America,  in 
the  persons  of  the  Right  Rev.  William  White,  D.D.,  Bishop 


APPENDIX.  397 

of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  State  of  Penn- 
sylvania; the  Right  Rev.  Samuel  Provoost,  D.D.,  Bishop  of 
the  said  Church  in  the  State  of  New  York;  and  the  Right 
Rev.  Samuel  Seabury,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  the  said  Church  in  the 
State  of  Connecticut. 

2d.  Resolved,  That  the  said  three  bishops  are  fully  com- 
petent to  every  proper  act  and  duty  of  the  Episcopal  office 
and  character  in  these  United  States,  as  well  in  respect  to 
the  consecration  of  other  bishops,  and  the  ordering  of  priests 
and  deacons,  as  for  the  government  of  the  Church,  accord- 
ing to  such  rules,  canons,  and  institutions,  as  now  are,  or 
hereafter  may  be  duly  made  and  ordained  by  the  Church  in 
that  case. 

3d.  Resolved,  That  in  Christian  charity,  as  well  as  of 
duty,  necessity,  and  expediency,  the  Churches  represented 
in  this  convention  ought  to  contribute,  in  every  manner  in 
their  power,  towards  supplying  the  wants,  and  granting 
every  just  and  reasonable  request  of  their  sister  Churches 
in  these  states;  and,  therefore, 

4th.  Resolved,  That  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  White,  and  the 
Right  Rev.  Dr.  Provoost,  be,  and  they  hereby  are,  requested 
to  join  with  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Seabury,  in  complying  with 
the  prayer  of  the  clergy  of  the  States  of  Massachusetts  and 
New  Hampshire,  for  the  consecration  of  the  Rev.  Edward 
Bass,  bishop-elect  of  the  Churches  in  the  said  states;  but 
that,  before  the  said  bishops  comply  with  the  request  afore- 
said, it  be  proposed  to  the  Churches  in  the  New  England 
states,  to  meet  the  Churches  of  these  states,  with  the  said 
three  bishops,  in  an  adjourned  convention,  to  settle  certain 
articles  of  union  and  discipline  among  all  the  Churches, 
previous  to  such  consecration. 

5th.  Resolved,  That  if  any  difficulty  or  delicacy  in  re- 
spect to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  England,  shall 
remain  with  the  Right  Rev.  Doctors  White  and  Provoost, 
or  either  of  them,  concerning  their  compliance  with  the 
above  request,  this  convention  will  address  the  archbishops 
and  bishops,  and  hope  thereby  to  remove  the  difficulty. 


398  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH, 

No.  19.     Page  165. 

An  Address  to  tJic  Most  Reverend  the  Archbishops  of  Can~ 
tcrbury  and  York. 

MOST  VENERABLE  AND  ILLUSTRIOUS  FATHERS 
AND  PRELATES, 

We,  the  bishops,  clergy  and  laity  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  States  of  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and  South 
Carolina,  impressed  with  every  sentiment  of  love  and  vene- 
ration, beg  leave  to  embrace  this  earliest  occasion,  in  Gen- 
eral Convention,  to  offer  our  warmest,  most  sincere,  and 
grateful  acknowledgments  to  you,  and  (by  your  means) 
to  all  the  venerable  bishops  of  the  Church  over  which  you 
preside,  for  the  manifold  instances  of  your  former  conde- 
scension to  us,  and  solicitude  for  our  spiritual  welfare.  But 
we  are  more  especially  called  to  express  our  thankfulness, 
for  that  particular  act  of  your  fatherly  goodness,  whereby 
we  derive,  under  you,  a  pure  Episcopacy,  and  succession  of 
the  ancient  order  of  bishops,  and  are  now  assembled, 
through  the  blessing  of  God,  as  a  Church  duly  constituted 
and  organized,  with  the  happy  prospect  before  us  of  a  fu- 
ture full  and  undisturbed  exercise  of  our  holy  religion,  and 
its  extension  to  the  utmost  bounds  of  this  continent,  under 
an  ecclesiastical  constitution,  and  a  form  of  worship,  which 
we  believe  to  be  truly  apostolical. 

The  growing  prospect  of  this  happy  diffusion  of  Christian- 
ity, and  the  assurance  we  can  give  you  that  our  Churches 
are  spreading  and  flourishing  throughout  these  United 
States,  we  know,  will  yield  you  more  solid  joy,  and  be  con- 
sidered as  a  more  ample  reward  of  your  goodness  to  us, 
than  all  the  praises  and  expressions  of  gratitude  which  the 
tongues  of  men  can  bestow. 

It  gives  us  pleasure  to  assure  you,  that,  during  the  pres- 
ent sitting  of  our  convention,  the  utmost  harmony  has 
prevailed  through  all  our  deliberations,  that  we  continue, 


APPENDIX,  399 

as  heretofore,  most  sincerely  attached  to  the  faith  and  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  of  England:  and  that  not  a  wish  ap- 
pears to  prevail,  either  among  our  clergy  or  laity,  of  ever 
departing  from  that  Church  in  any  essential  article. 

The  business  of  most  material  consequence  which  hath 
come  before  us,  at  our  present  meeting,  hath  been  an  ap- 
plication from  our  sister  Churches  in  the  eastern  states, 
expressing  their  earnest  desire  of  a  general  union  of  the 
whole  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States,  both  in  doc- 
trine and  discipline;  and,  as  a  primary  means  of  such  union, 
praying  the  assistance  of  our  bishops  in  the  consecration  of 
a  bishop-elect  for  the  States  of  Massachusetts  and  New 
Hampshire.  We  therefore  judge  it  necessary  to  accompany 
this  address  with  the  papers  which  have  come  before  us  on 
that  very  interesting  subject,  and  of  the  proceedings  we 
have  had  thereupon,  by  which  you  will  be  enabled  to  judge 
concerning  the  particular  delicacy  of  our  situation,  and, 
probably,  to  relieve  us  from  any  difficulties  which  may  be 
found  therein. 

The  application  from  the  Church  in  the  States  of  Massa- 
chusetts and  New  Hampshire  is  in  the  following  words. 

[Here  follows  the  application  as  in  the  preceding  number.] 

At  the  meeting  aforesaid, 

Voted,  That  the  Rev.  Samuel  Parker  be  authorized  and 
empowered  to  'transmit  copies  of  the  foregoing  act,  to  be 
by  him  attested,  to  the  right  reverend  the  bishops  in  Con- 
necticut, New  York,  and  Pennsylvania;  and  that  he  be  ap- 
pointed our  agent,  to  appear  at  any  convocation  to  be 
holden  at  Pennsylvania,  or  New  York;  and  to  treat  upon 
any  measures  that  may  tend  to  promote  a  union  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  throughout  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica, or  that  may  prove  advantageous  to  the  interest  of  the 
said  Church. 

EDWARD  BASS,  Chairman. 
A  true  copy. 
(Attest)  SAMUEL  PARKER. 


400  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

This  was  accompanied  with  a  letter  from  the  Rev.  Sam- 
uel Parker,  the  worthy  rector  of  Trinity  Church,  Boston,  to 
the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  White,  dated  June  2ist,  1789,  of 
which  the  following  is  an  extract: — "The  clergy  here  have 
appointed  me  their  agent,  to  appear  at  any  convocation  to 
be  held  at  New  York  or  Pennsylvania;  but  I  fear  the  situa- 
tion of  my  family  and  parish  will  not  admit  of  my  being 
absent  so  long  as  a  journey  to  Philadelphia  would  take. 
When  I  gave  you  encouragement  that  I  should  attend,  I 
was  in  expectation  of  having  my  parish  supplied  by  some 
gentlemen  from  Nova  Scotia;  but  I  am  now  informed,  they 
will  not  be  here  till  some  time  in  August.  Having,  there- 
fore, no  prospect  of  attending  in  person  at  your  General  Con- 
vention, next  month,  I  am  requested  to  transmit  you  an  at- 
tested copy  of  an  act  of  the  clergy  of  this  and  the  State  of 
New  Hampshire,  electing  the  Rev.  Edward  Bass  our  Bishop, 
and  requesting  the  united  assistance  of  the  right  reverend 
bishops  of  Pennsylvania,  New  York,  and  Connecticut,  to 
invest  him  with  apostolic  powers.  This  act  I  have  now  the 
honor  of  enclosing,  and  hope  it  will  reach  you  before  the 
meeting  of  your  General  Convention  in  July. 

"  The  clergy  of  this  state  are  very  desirous  of  seeing  a 
union  of  the  whole  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States 
take  place;  and  it  will  remain  with  our  brethren  at  the 
southward  to  say,  whether  this  shall  be  the  case  or  not; 
whether  we  shall  be  a  united  or  divided  Church.  Some 
little  difference  in  government  may  exist  in  different  states, 
without  affecting  the  essential  points  of  union  and  com- 
munion." 

In  the  like  spirit,  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Seabury,  Bishop  of 
the  Church  of  Connecticut,  in  his  letter  to  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Smith,  dated  July  23d,  writes  on  the  subject  of  union,  etc., 
as  followeth: — "The  wish  of  my  heart,  and  the  wish  of  the 
clergy  and  of  the  Church  people  of  this  state,  would  cer- 
tainly have  carried  me  and  some  of  the  clergy  to  your 
General  Convention,  had  we  conceived  we  could  have  at- 
tended with  propriety.  The  necessity  of  a  union  of  all  the 


APPENDIX.  401 

Churches,  and  the  disadvantages  of  our  present  disunion, 
we  feel  and  lament  equally  with  you;  and  I  agree  with  you, 
that  there  may  be  a  strong  and  efficacious  union  between 
Churches,  where  the  usages  are  different.  I  see  not  why  it 
may  not  be  so  in  the  present  case,  as  soon  as  you  have  re- 

f   moved  those  obstructions,  which,  while  they  remain,  must        %y 
prevent  all  possibility  of  unitmg.     The  Church  of  Connect-  . 

icut   consists,   at  present,   of  nineteen    clergymen    in    full  /  (J  C4^r 
orders,  and  more  than  twenty  thousand  people,  they  sup- 
pose,   as  respectable  as  the   Church   in  any  state  of  the 
union." 

After  the  most  serious  deliberation  upon  this  important 
business,  and  cordially  joining  with  our  brethren  of  the 
eastern  or  New  England  Churches  in  the  desire  of  union, 
the  following  resolves  were  unanimously  adopted  in  conven- 
tion, viz. — 

[Here  follow  the  resolves,  as  given  in  the  preceding 
number.] 

We  have  now,  most  venerable  fathers,  submitted  to  your 
consideration  whatever  relates  to  this  important  business  of 
union  among  all  our  Churches  in  these  United  States.  It 
was  our  original  and  sincere  intention  to  have  obtained  three 
bishops  at  least,  immediately  consecrated  by  the  bishops  of 
England,  for  the  seven  states  comprehended  within  our  pres- 
ent union.  But  that  intention  being  frustrated  through 
unforeseen  circumstances,  we  could  not  wish  to  deny  any 
present  assistance,  which  may  be  found  in  our  power  to 
give  to  any  of  our  sister  Churches,  in  that  way  which 
may  be  most  acceptable  to  them,  and  in  itself  legal  and 
expedient. 

We  ardently  pray  for  the  continuance  of  your  favor  and 
blessing,  and  that,  as  soon  as  the  urgency  of  other  weighty 
concerns  of  the  Church  will  allow,  we  may  be  favored  with 
that  fatherly  advice  and  direction  which  to  you  may  ap- 
pear most  for  the  glory  of  God  and  the  prosperity  of  our 
Churches,  upon  the  consideration  of  the  foregoing  docu- 
ments and  papers. 


402  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Done  in  Convention,  this  8th  day  of  August,  1789,  and  di- 
rected to  be  signed  by  all  the  members,  as  the  act  of  their 
body,  and  by  the  president  officially* 


No.  20.     Page  170. 

A  General  Constitution  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States  of  A  merica. 

ART.  i.  There  shall  be  a  General  Convention  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica, on  the  first  Tuesday  of  August,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
1792,  and  on  the  first  Tuesday  of  August  in  every  third 
year  afterwards,  in  such  place  as  shall  be  determined  by  the 
convention;  and  special  meetings  may  be  called  at  other 
times,  in  the  manner  hereafter  to  be  provided  for;  and  this 
Church,  in  a  majority  of  the  states  which  shall  have  adopted 
this  constitution,  shall  be  represented,  before  they  shall  pro- 
ceed~to  business,  except  that  the  representation  from  two 
states  shall  be  sufficient  to  adjourn;  and  in  all  business  of 
the  convention,  freedom  of  debate  shall  be  allowed. 

ART.  2.  The  Church  in  each  state  shall  be  entitled  to  a 
representation  of  both  the  clergy  and  the  laity;  which  rep- 
resentation shall  consist  of  one  or  more  deputies,  not  ex- 
ceeding four  of  each  order,  chosen  by  the  convention  of  the 
state;  ana  m  all  questions,  when  required  by  the  clerical 
or  lay  representation  from  any  state,  each  order  shall  have 
one  vote;  and  tne  majority  of  suffrages  by  states  shall  be 
conclusive  in  each  order,  provided  such  majority  compre- 
hend a  majority  of  the  states  represented  in  that  order. 
The  concurrence  of  both  orders  shall  be  necessary  to  con- 
stitute a  vote  of  the  convention.  If  the  convention  of  any 
state  should  neglect  or  decline  to  appoint  clerical  deputies, 
or  if  they  should  neglect  or  decline  to  appoint  lay  deputies, 

•  Signed  by  the  president  and  all  the  members. 


APPENDIX.  403 

or  if  any  of  those  of  either  order  appointed  should  neglect 
to  attend,  or  be  prevented  by  sickness  or  any  other  acci- 
dent, such  state  shall  nevertheless  be  considered  as  duly 
represented  by  such  deputy  or  deputies  as  may  attend, 
whether  lay  or  clerical.  And  if,  through  the  neglect  of  the 
convention  of  any  of  the  Churches  which  shall  have  adopt- 
ed, or  may  hereafter  adopt  this  Constitution,  no  deputies, 
either  lay  or  clerical,  should  attend  at  any  General  Con- 
vention, the  Church  in  such  state  shall  nevertheless  be 
bound  by  the  acts  of  such  convention. 

ART.  3.  The  Bishops  of  this  Church,  when  there  shall 
be  three  or  more,  shall,  whenever  General  Conventions  are  / 

held,  form  a  house  of  revision,  and  when  any  proposed  act£>*l>*~    ' 
shall  have  passed  in   the  General    Convention,   the  same^vy  . 
shall  be  transmitted  to  the  house  of  revision,  for  their  con- 
currence.    And  if  the  same  shall  be  sent  back  to  the  con- 
vention, with  the  negative  or  non-concurrence  of  the  house 
of  revision,  it  shall  be  again  considered  in  the  General  Con- 
vention, and  if  the  convention  shall  adhere  to  the  said  act,   ^ 
by  a  majority  of  three  fifths  of  their  body,  it  shall  become  -^*~  ^ 
a  law  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  notwithstanding  the  non- 
concurrence  of  the  house  of  revision;  and  all  acts  of  the     Jl  -&L 
convention  shall  be  authenticated  by  both  houses.     And  in 
all  cases,  the  House  of  Bishops  shall  signify  to  the  conven- 
tion their  approbation  or  disapprobation,  the   latter  with 
their  reasons Jnjvvritmg,  within  two  days  after  the  proposed 
act  shall  have  been  reported  to  them  for  concurrence,  and 
in  failure  thereof  it  shall  have  the  operation  of  a  law.     But 
until  there  shall  be  three  or  more  bishops,  as  aforesaid,  any 
bishop  attending  a  General  Convention,  shall  be  a  mem- 
ber ex-officio,  and  shall  vote  with  the  clerical  deputies  of 
the  state  to  which  he  belongs.     And  a  bishop  shall  then 
preside. 

ART.  4.  The  bishop  or  bishops  in  every  state  shall  be 
chosen  agreeably  to  such  rules  as  shall  be  fixed  by  the  con- 
vention of  that  state.  And  every  bishop  of  this  Church 
shall  confine  the  exercise  of  his  Episcopal  office  to  his 


404  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

proper  diocese  or  district,  unless  requested  to  ordain,  or 
confirm,  or  perform  any  other  act  of  the  Episcopal  office, 
by  any  Church  destitute  of  a  bishop. 

ART.  5.  A  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  any  of  the 
United  States,  not  now  represented,  may,  at  any  time 
hereafter,  be  admitted,  on  acceding  to  this  Constitution. 

ART.  6.     In  every  state,  the  mode  of  trying  clergymen 
shall  be  instituted  by  the  Convention  of  the  Church  therein. 
At  every  trial  of  a  bishop,  there  shall  be  one  or  more  of  the  S 
Episcopal  order  present;  and  none  but  a  bishop  shall  pro-  ) 
nounce  sentence  of  deposition  or  degradation  from  the  min- 
istry on  any  clergyman,  whether  bishop,  or  presbyter,  or 
deacon. 

ART.  7.  No  person  shall  be  admitted  to  holy  Orders, 
until  he  shall  have  been  examined  by  the  bishop,  and  by 
two  presbyters,  and  shall  have  exhibited  such  testimonials 
and  other  requisites  as  the  canons,  in  that  case  provided, 
may  direct.  Nor  shall  any  person  be  ordained,  until  he 
shall  have  subscribed  the  following  declaration:  "I  do  be- 
lieve the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
to  be  the  Word  of  God,  and  to  contain  all  things  necessary 
to  salvation:  And  I  do  solemnly  engage  to  conform  to  the 
doctrines  and  worship  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  these  United  States."  No  person  ordained  by  a  foreign 
bishop  shall  be  permitted  to  officiate  as  a  minister  of  this 
Church,  until  he  shall  have  complied  with  the  canon  or 
canons  in  that  case  provided,  and  have  also  subscribed  the 
aforesaid  declaration. 

ART.  8.  A  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  administration  of 
the  sacraments,  and  other  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the 
Church,  Articles  of  Religion,  and  a  form  and  manner  of 
making,  ordaining,  and  consecrating  bishops,  priests,  and 
deacons,  when  established  by  this  or  a  future  General  Con- 
vention, shall  be  used  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  these  states,  which  shall  have  adopted  this  Constitution. 

ART.  9.  This  Constitution  shall  be  unalterable,  unless 
in  General  Convention  by  the  Church  in  a  majority  of  the 


APPENDIX.  405 

states  which  may  have  adopted  the  same;  and  all  altera- 
tions shall  be  first  proposed  in  one  General  Convention,  and 
made  known  to  the  several  state  conventions,  before  they 
shall  be  finally  agreed  to,  or  ratified  in  the  ensuing  General 
Convention. 


Alterations  in  the  Subsequent  Session. 

"The  committee  reported,  that  they  have  had  a  full, 
free,  and  friendly  conference  with  the  deputies  of  the  said 
Churches,  who,  on  behalf  of  the  Church  in  their  several 
states,  and  by  virtue  of  sufficient  authority  from  them,  have 
signified,  that  they  do  not  object  to  the  Constitution,  which 
was  approved  at  the  former  session  of  this  convention,  if  the 
Third  Article  of  that  Constitution  may  be  so  modified,  as  to 
declare  explicitly  the  right  of  the  bishops,  when  sitting  in  a 
separate  house,  to  originate  and  propose  acts  for  the  con- 
currence of  the  other  house  of  convention;  and  to  nega- 
tive such  acts  proposed  by  the  other  house  as  they  may 
disapprove. 

"  Your  committee,  conceiving  this  alteration  to  be  desir- 
able in  itself,  as  having  a  tendency  to  give  greater  stability 
to  the  Constitution,  without  diminishing  any  security  that 
is  now  possessed  by  the  clergy  or  laity;  and  being  sincerely 
impressed  with  the  importance^  of  a  union  to  the  future 
prosperity  of  the  Church,  clo  therefore  recommend  to  the 
convention  a  compliance  with  the  wishes  of  their  brethren, 
and  that  the  Third  Article  of  the  Constitution  may  be  altered 
accordingly.  Upon  such  alteration  being  made,  it  is  de- 
clared by  the  deputies  from  the  Churches  in  the  eastern 
states,  that  they  will  subscribe  the  Constitution,  and  be- 
come members  of  this  General  Convention." 

Upon  special  motion,  the  above  report  was  read  a  second 
time;  whereupon  the  following  resolution  was  proposed, 
viz.  — 

Resolved,  That  this  convention  do  adopt  that  part  of 
the  report  of  the  committee  which  proposes  to  modify  the 


406  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Third  Article  of  the  Constitution,  so  as  to  declare  explicitly 
"  the  right  of  the  bishops,  when  sitting  in  a  separate  house, 
to  originate  and  propose  acts  for  the  concurrence  of  the 
other  house  of  convention;  and  to  negative  such  acts  pro- 
posed by  the  other  house,  as  they  may  disapprove;  pro- 
vided they  are  not  adhered  to  by  four  fifths  of  the  other 
house." 

After  some  debate,  the  resolution,  with  the  proviso  an- 
nexed, was  agreed  upon,  and  the  Third  Article  was  accord- 
ingly modified  in  the  manner  following,  viz. — 

ART.  3d.  The  Bishops  of  this  Church,  when  there  shall 
be  three  or  more,  shall,  whenever  General  Conventions  are 
held,  form  a  separate  Jiouse,  with  a  right  to  originate  and 
propose  acts  for  the  concurrence  of  the  House  of  Deputies, 
composed  of  clergy  and  laity;  and  when  any  proposed  act 
shall  have  passed  the  House  of  Deputies,  the  same  shall  be 
transmitted  to  the  House  of  Bishops,  who  shall  have  a  nega- 
tive thereupon,  unless  adhered  to  by  four  fifths  of  the  other 
house;  and  all  acts  of  the  convention  shall  be  authenticated  by 
both  houses.  And,  in  all  cases,  the  House  of  Bishops  shall 
signify  to  the  convention  their  approbation  or  disapprobation, 
the  latter,  with  their  reasons  in  writing,  within  three  days 
after  the  proposed  act  shall  have  been  reported  to  them  for 
concurrence:  and  in  failure  thereof,  it  shall  have  the  opera- 
tion of  a  law.  But  until  there  shall  be  three  or  more  bishops 
as  aforesaid,  any  bishop  attending  a  General  Convention  shall 
be  a  member,  cx-officio,  and  shall  vote  with  the  clerical  depu- 
ties of  the  state  to  which  he  belongs;  and  a  bishop  shall  then 
preside. 


APPENDIX.  407 

Acceptance  by  Bishop  Seabury,  and  the  Presbyters  from  New  England. 

OCTOBER  2,  1789. 

We  do  hereby  agree  to  the  Constitution  of  the  Church, 
as  modified  this  day  in  convention. 

SAMUEL   SEABURY,  D.D., 

Bishop  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Connecticut. 

ABRAHAM  JARVIS,   A.M., 

Rector  of  Christ  Church,  Middletown,  Connecticut. 

BELA  HUBBARD,  A.M., 

Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  New  Haven,  Connecticut. 

SAMUEL   PARKER,   D.D., 

Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  Boston,  and  Clerical  Deputy  for 
Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire.* 


Letters  of  Consecration  of  Bishop  Seabury, 

IN  DEI  NOMINE.     Amen. 
Ommbus  ubique  Catholicis  per  Presentes  pateat, 

Nos,  Robertum  Kilgpur,  miseratione  divina,  Episcopum 
Aberdonien — Arthurum  Fetrie,  Episcopum  Rossen  et  Mo- 
ravien — et  Joannem  Skinner,  Episcopum  Coadjutorem; 
Mysteria,  Sacra  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi  in  Oratorio 
supradicti  Joannis  Skinner  apud  Aberdoniam  celebrantes, 
Divini  Numinis  Praesidio  fretos  (presentibus  tam  e  Clero, 
quam  e  Populo  testibus  idoneis)  Samuelem  Seabury,  Doc- 
torem  Divinitatis,  sacro  Presbyteratus  ordine  jam  decora- 
turn,  ac  nobis  prae  Vitae  integritate,  Morum  probitate  et 
Orthodoxia,  commendatum,  et  ad  docendum  et  regendum 
aptum  et  idoneum,  ad  sacrum  et  sublimem  Episcopatus 
Ordinem  promovisse,  et  rite  ac  canonice,  secundum  Morem 
et  Ritus  Ecclesiae  Scoticanae,  consecrasse,  Die  Novembris 


*  The   original,   as   is   often   the   case  with   these   documents,   has   abbrevia- 
tions.    Ed. 


408  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

decimo  quarto,  Anno  ^Erae  Christianae  Millesimo  Septin- 
gentesimo  Octagcsimo  Quarto. — 

In  CIIJHS  Rci  Tcstimonimn,  Instrumcnto  huic  (chirograpJtis 
nostris  prius,  munito]  Sigilla  nostra  apponi  mandavimus. 

Roberius  Kilgour,  Episcopus,  et  Primus.     (L.  S.) 
Arlhurus  Petrie,  Episcopus.  (L.  S.) 

Jotinnes  Si-inner,  Episcopus,  (L.  S.) 


No.  21.     Page  199. 
A  Letter  from  the  Rev.  Dr.  Coke,  and  the  Answer* 

RIGHT  REV.  SIR, 

Permit  me  to  intrude  a  little  on  your  time  upon  a  sub- 
ject of  great  importance. 

You,  I  believe,  are  conscious  that  I  was  brought  up  in 
the  Church  of  England,  and  have  been  ordained  a  presbyter 
of  that  Church.  For  many  years  I  was  prejudiced,  even  I 
think  to  bigotry,  in  favor  of  it;  but  through  a  variety  of 
causes  or  incidents,  to  mention  which  would  be  tedious  and 
useless,  my  mind  was  exceedingly  biassed  on  the  other  side 
of  the  question.  In  consequence  of  this,  I  am  not  sure  but  \ 
I  went  further  in  the  separation  of  our  Church  in  America, 
than  Mr.  Wesley,  from  whom  I  had  received  my  commission,  / 
did  intend.  He  did  indeed  solemnly  invest  me,  as  far  as  he 
had  a  right  so  to  do,*  with  Episcopal  authority,  but  did  not 
intend,  I  think,  that  an  entire  separation  should  take  place. 
He,  being  pressed  by  our  friends  on  this  side  of  the  water 
for  ministers  to  administer  the  sacraments  to  them  (there 
being  very  few  of  the  clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  then 
in  the  states),  went  further,  I  am  sure,  than  he  would  have 
gone,  if  he  had  foreseen  some  events  which  followed.  And  \ 
this  I  am  certain  of — that  he  is  now  sorry  for  the  separation.  / 

But  what  can  be  done  for  a  reunion,  which  I  much  wish 

•  The  original  is  in  the  Archives  of  the  General  Convention.     Ed. 


APPENDIX.  409 

for,  and  to  accomplish  which,  Mr.  Wesley,  I  have  no  doubt, 
would  use  his  influence  to  the  utmost  ?  The  affection  of  a 
very  considerable  number  of  the  preachers  and  most  of  the 
people,  is  very  strong  towards  him,  notwithstanding  the  ex- 
\  cessive  ill  usage  he  received  from  a  few.  My  Interest  also 
is  not  small,  and  both  his  and  mine  would  readily,  and  to 
the  utmost,  be  used  to  accomplish  that  (to  us)  very  desir- 
able object;  if  a  readiness  were  shown  by  the  bishops  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  to  reunite. 

It  is  even  to  your  CJiurch  an  object  of  great  importance. 
We  have  now  above  sixty  thousand  adults  in  our  society  in 
these  states,  and  about  two  hundred  and  fifty  travelling 
ministers  and  preachers;  besides  a  great  number  of  local 
preachers,  very  far  exceeding  the  number  of  travelling 
preachers;  and  some  of  those  local  preachers  are  men  of 
very  considerable  abilities.  But  if  we  number  the  Metho- 
dists as  most  people  number  the  members  of  their  Church, 
viz.,  by  the  families  which  constantly  attend  the  divine  or- 
dinances in  their  places  of  worship,  they  will  make  a  larger 
body  than  you  probably  conceive.  The  society,  I  believe, 
may  be  safely  multiplied  by  five  on  an  average  to  give  us 
our  stated  congregations;  which  will  then  amount  to  three 
hundred  thousand.  And  if  the  calculation  which,  I  think, 
some  eminent  writers  have  made,  be  just,  that  three  fifths 
of  mankind  are  un-adult  (if  I  may  use  the  expression),  at 
any  given  period,  it  will  follow  that  all  the  families,  the 
adults  of  which  form  our  congregations  in  these  states, 
amount  to  seven  hundred  and  fifty  thousand.  About  one 
fifth  of  these  are  blacks. 

The  work  now  extends  in  length  from  Boston  to  the 
south  of  Georgia;  and  in  breadth  from  the  Atlantic  to  Lake 
Champlain,  Vermont,  Albany,  Redstone,  Holstein,  Ken- 
tucky, Cumberland,  etc. 

But  there  are  many  hindrances  in  the  way.  Can  they 
be  removed  ? 

i.  Our  ordained^  ministers  will  not,  ought  not,  to  give  up 
their  right  of  administering  the  sacraments.  I  do  not  think 


410  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

that  the  generality  of  them,  perhaps  none  of  them,  would 
refuse  to  submit  to  a  re-ordination,  if  other  hindrances 
were  removed  out  of  the  way.  I  must  here  observe,  that 
between  sixty  and  seventy  only  out  of  the  two  hundred 
and  fifty  haVe  been  ordained  presbyters,  and  about  sixty 
deacons  (only).  The  presbyters  are  the  choicest  of  the 
whole. 

2.  The  other  preachers  would  hardly  submit  to  a  re- 
union, if  the  possibility  of  their  rising  up  to  ordination 
depended  on  the  present  bishops  in  America.  Because, 
though  they  are  all,  I  think  I  may  say,  zealous,  pious,  and 
very  useful  men,  yet  they  are  not  acquainted  with  the 
learned  languages.  Besides,  they  would  argue, — If  the 
present  bishops  would  waive  the  article  of  the  learned  lan- 
guages, yet  their  successors  might  not. 

My  desire  of  a  reunion  is  so  sincere  and  earnest,  that 
these  difficulties  almost  make  me  tremble;  and  yet  some-  i 
thing  must  be  done  before^the  death  of  Mr.  Wesley,  other-  L 
wise  I  shall  despair  of  success:   for  though  my  influence     ) 
among  the  Methodists  in  these  states  as  well  as  in  Europe  \ 
is,  I  doubt  not,  increasing,  yet  Mr.  Asbury,  whose  influence  \ 
is  very  capital,  wjll  not  easily  comply;  nay,  I  know  he  will  A 
be  exceedingly  averse  to  it.  f 

In  Europe,  where  some  steps  had  been  taken,  tending  to 
a  separation,  all  is  at  an  end.  Mr.  Wesley  is ji  determined 
enemy  of  it,  and  I  have  lately  borne  an  open  and  success- 
ful testimony  against  it. 

Shall  I  be  favored  with  a  private  interview  with  you  in 
Philadelphia?  I  shall  be  there,  God  willing,  on  Tuesday, 
the  i/th  of  May.  If  this  be  agreeable,  I  will  beg  of  you 
just  to  signify  it  in  a  note,  directed  to  me,  at  Mr.  Jacob 
Baker's,  merchant,  Market-street,  Philadelphia;  or,  if  you 
please,  by  a  few  lines  sent  me  by  the  return  of  the  post,  at 
Philip  Rogers's,  Esq.,  in  Baltimore,  from  yourself  or  Dr. 
Magaw,  and  I  will  wait  upon  you  with  my  friend  Dr. 
Magaw.  We  can  then  enlarge  on  these  subjects. 

I  am  conscious  of  it,  that  secrecy  is  of  great  importance 


APPENDIX.  411 

in  the  present  state  of  the  business,  till  the  minds  of  you, 
your  brother  bishops,  and  Mr.  Wesley,  be  circumstantially 
known.  I  must  therefore  beg  that  these  things  be  confined 
to  yourself  and  Dr.  Magaw,  till  I  have  the  honor  of  seeing 
you. 

Thus,  you  see,  I  have  made  a  bold  venture  on  your  hon- 
or and  candor,  and  have  opened  my  whole  heart  to  you 
on  the  subject,  as  far  as  the  extent  of  a  small  letter  will 
allow  me.  If  you  put  equal  confidence  in  me,  you  will  find 
me  candid  and  faithful. 

I  have,  notwithstanding,  been  guilty  of  inadvertencies. 
Very  lately  I  found  myself  obliged  (for  the  pacifying  of  my 
conscience)  to  write  a  penitential  letter  to  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Jarratt,  which  gave  him  great  satisfaction:  and  for  the 
same  reason  I  must  write  another  to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Petti- 
grew.  When  I  was  last  in  America,  I  prepared  and  cor- 
rected a  great  variety  of  things  for  our  magazines,  indeed 
almost  every  thing  that  was  printed,  except  some  loose 
hints  which  I  had  taken  of  one  of  my  journeys,  and  which 
I  left  in  my  hurry  with  Mr.  Asbury,  without  any  correction, 
entreating  that  no  part  of  them  might  be  printed  which 
would  be  improper  or  offensive.  But  through  great  inad- 
vertency (I  suppose)  he  suffered  some  reflections  on  the 
characters  of  the  two  above-mentioned  gentlemen  to  be  in- 
serted in  the  magazine,  for  which  I  am  very  sorry:  and 
probably  shall  not  rest  till  I  have  made  my  acknowledg- 
ment more  public;  though  Mr.  Jarratt  does  not  desire  it. 

I  am  not  sure  whether  I  have  not  also  offended  you,  Sir, 
by  accepting  of  one  of  the  offers  made  me  by  you  and  Dr. 
Magaw,  of  the  use  of  your  churches,  about  six  years  ago,  on 
my  first  visit  to  Philadelphia,  without  informing  you  of  our 
plan  of  separation  from  the  Church  of  England.  If  I  did 
offend  (as  I  doubt  I  did  especially  from  what  you  said  on 
the  subject  to  Mr.  Richard  Dellam,  of  Abington),  I  sin- 
cerely beg  yours  and  Dr.  Magaw's  pardon.  I  will  endeavor 
to  amend.  But,  alas !  I  am  a  frail,  weak  creature. 

I  will  intrude  no  longer  at  present.     One  thing  only  I 


4I2  MEMOIRS  OF   THE    CHURCH. 

will  claim  from  your  candor — that  if  you  have  no  thoughts 
of  improving  this  proposal,  you  will  burn  this  letter,  and 
take  no  more  notice  of  it  (for  it  would  be  a  pity  to  have  us 
entirely  alienated  from  each  other,  if  we  can  not  unite  in 
the  manner  my  ardent  wishes  desire).  But  if  you  will  fur- 
ther negotiate  the  business,  I  will  explain  my  mind  still 
more  fully  to  you  on  the  probabilities  of  success. 

In  the  mean  time  permit  me,  with  great  respect,  to  sub- 
scribe myself, 

Right  Rev.  Sir, 

Your  very  humble  servant  in  Christ, 

THOMAS  COKE. 

Richmond,  April  24,  1791. 
The  Right  Rev.  Father  in  God,  Bishop  White. 

You  must  excuse  interlineations,  etc.,  as  I  am  just  going 
into  the  country,  and  have  no  time  to  transcribe. 


Answer. 

REV.  SIR, 

My  friend,  Dr.  Magaw,  has  this  day  put  into  my  hands 
your  letter  of  the  24th  of  April,  which,  I  trust,  I  received 
with  a  sense  of  the  importance  of  the  subject,  and  of  the 
answer  I  am  to  give  to  God,  for  the  improvement  of  every 
opportunity  of  building  up  His  Church.  Accordingly,  I 
can  not  but  make  choice  of  the  earliest  of  the  two  ways  you 
point  out,  to  inform  you  that  I  shall  be  very  happy  in  the 
opportunity  of  conversing  with  you  at  the  time  proposed. 

You  mention  two  difficulties  in  the  way  of  the  proposed 
union.  And  there  are  further  difficulties  which  suggest 
themselves  to  my  mind.  But  I  can  say  of  the  one  and  of 
the  other,  that  I  do  not  think  them  insuperable,  provided 
there  be  a  conciliatory  disposition  on  both  sides.  So  far  as 
I  am  concerned,  I  think  that  such  a  disposition  exists. 

It  has  not  been  my  temper,  Sir,  to  despond  in  regard  to 


APPENDIX.  413 

the  extension  of  Christianity  in  this  new  world:  And  in  ad- 
dition to  the  promises  of  the  Great  Head  of  the  Church,  I 
have  always  imagined  that  I  perceived  the  train  of  second 
causes  so  laid  by  the  good  providence  of  God,  as  to  be  pro- 
moting what  we  believe  to  be  His  will  in  this  respect.  On 
the  other  hand,  I  feel  the  weight  of  most  powerful  discour- 
agements, in  the  increasing  number  of  the  avowed  patrons 
of  infidelity,  and  of  others,  who  pretend  to  confess  the 
divine  authority  of  our  holy  religion,  while  they  endeavor 
to  strip  it  of  its  characteristic  doctrines.  In  this  situation, 
it  is  rather  to  be  expected,  that  distinct  Churches,  agreeing 
in  fundamentals,  should  make  mutual  sacrifices  for  a  union, 
than  that  any  Church  should  divide  into  two  bodies,  with- 
out a  difference  being  even  alleged  to  exist,  in  any  leading 
point.  For  the  preventing  of  this,  the  measures  which  you 
may  propose  can  not  fail  of  success,  unless  there  be  on  one 
side  or  on  both,  a  most  lamentable  deficiency  of  Christian 
temper. 

I  remember  the  conversation  you  allude  to  with  Mr.  Del- 
lam:  I  hope  I  did  not  express  myself  uncharitably,  or  even 
indelicately.  As  to  personal  offence  towards  me,  it  is  out 
of  the  question:  for  I  had  not  at  that  time  any  connection 
with  St.  Paul's  Church.  But  this,  as  well  as  the  other  parts 
of  your  letter,  may  be  discoursed  of  at  the  proposed  inter- 
view. Therefore,  with  assurance  of  the  desired  secrecy, 
and  with  requesting  you  to  accept  a  like  promise  of  candor 
to  that  which  I  credit  from  you,  I  conclude  myself  at 
present, 

Your  brother  in  Christ, 

And  very  humble  servant, 

W.  W.* 


*  The  writer  of  the  above  answer  kept  silence  on  the  subject  of  it,  except  in 
the  permitted  communication  to  the  bishops,  until  the  summer  of  1804;  when  he 
received,  in  one  day,  two  letters  from  the  eastern  shore  of  Maryland.  One  of 
them  was  from  the  Rev^ Simon  Wilmer,,  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  and  the  other 
was  from  the  Rev.  Mr.  M'Klaskey,  of  the  Methodist  communion.  In  a  conver- 
sation between  these  two  gentlemen,  the  former  had  affirmed  the  fact  of  Dr. 


4H  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No.  22.     Page  202. 
Testimonial  of  the  Rev.  Charles  Pcttigreiv. 

We,  the  subscribers,  having  met  in  convention,  at  Tar- 
borough,  in  North  Carolina,  on  the  28th  day  of  May,  1794, 
for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  declining  situation  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this  state,  and  having 
chosen  the  Rev.  Charles  Pettigrew  as  a  person  fit  to  be  our 
bishop,  and  worthy  to  be  recommended  for  consecration  to 
that  holy  office — but  being  sensible  that  the  great  distance 
at  which  the  laity  as  well  as  the  clergy  of  this  state  live 
from  each  other,  deprives  us  of  sufficient  personal  acquaint- 
ance with  one  another  to  subscribe  a  testimonial  in  the 
words  prescribed  by  the  General  Convention  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church,  have  thought  it  necessary  and 
proper  to  make  some  deviation  therefrom,  which  we  pre- 
sume to  hope  will  be  no  obstacle  to  our  laudable  pursuit. 
We  therefore  do  hereby  recommend  to  be  consecrated  to 
the  office  of  a  bishop,  the  said  Rev.  Charles  Pettigrew, 
whom,  from  his  morality,  religious  principles,  piety  of  life, 
from  his  general  reputation  in  a  clerical  character,  from  the 
personal  knowledge  we  have  of  him,  and  from  his  suffi- 
ciency in  good  learning,  and  soundness  in  the  faith,  we  are 
induced  to  believe  worthy  of  being  consecrated  to  that  im- 
portant office.  We  hereby  promise  and  engage  to  receive 
him  as  such  when  canonically  consecrated  and  invested 
therewith,  and  to  render  that  canonical  obedience  which 
we  believe  to  be  necessary  to  the  due  and  proper  discharge 
of  so  important  a  trust  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  And  we 
now  address  the  right  reverend  the  bishops  in  the  several 
United  States,  praying  their  united  assistance  in  conse- 

Coke's  application,  which  was  disbelieved  by  the  other.  This  produced  their  re- 
spective letters,  which  were  answered  by  a  statement  of  the  fact.  The  matter 
being  afterwards  variously  reported,  a  copy  of  the  letter  was,  after  some  lapse  of 
time,  delivered  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Kemp,  of  Maryland,  and  at  last  became  published 
in  a  controversy  raised  in  the  diocese. 


APPENDIX.  4 1 5 

crating  this  our  said  brother,  and  canonically  investing  him 
with  the  apostolic  office  and  powers.  In  testimony  where- 
of, we  hereunto  subscribe  our  names,  the  day  and  year 
above  written. 

N.  BLOUNT,     1 

J.  L.  WILSON, 

J.  GURLEY,        [  Of  the  clergy. 

S.  HALLING, 

R.  J.  MILLER,  J 

J.  LEIGH,  M.D., 

J.  GUION,  M.D., 

R.  WHYTE,  )  T 

B.  WOODS,  '[Lawyers- 


W.  CLEMENTS, 
L.  DESSEAUX, 
W.  GRIMES, 
R.  GODLY, 


-Of  the  laity. 


No.  23.     Page  203. 
Circular  of  a  Committee  in  South  Carolina. 

GENTLEMEN,* 

Impressed  with  a  fervent  desire  of  being  beneficial  to  the 
state  in  general,  and  of  supporting  religion  among  us,  we, 
the  subscribers,  being  a  select  committee  from  several  of 
the  united  Episcopal  Churches  in  this  state,  who  met  on 
the  i6th  of  last  October,  are  directed  to  address  you.  The 
subject  is  an  important  one,  and  requires  consideration. 
From  the  proceedings  of  the  two  last  General  Conventions, 
held  at  Philadelphia  and  New  York,  it  has,  with  regret, 
been  found  by  the  representatives  of  this  state,  that  the 
intention  of  all  the  eastern  states  was  to  form  two  separate 

*  In  the  document  some  of  the  words  are  in  larger  characters  than  the  rest. 
The  same  words  are  here  given  in  italics,  with  the  view  of  making  a  faithful 
representation  of  the  instrument :  the  framers  of  which  were  careful  to  give  this 
explanation  of  their  design  ;  however  beneath  them  an  attention  to  the  laws  of 
grammar. 


416  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

houses  of  discussion  on  the  forms  and  propagation  of  re- 
ligion.    To  this  all  consented,  not  foreseeing  any  ill  effects 
immediately  arising  from  it.     The  one  composed  of  bishops 
solely,  the  other  of  clergy  and  laity  conjointly;  and  that  a 
full  consent  of  one  house,  together  with  two  thirds  of  the 
other,  must  be  obtained,  to  effectually  carry  any  proposi- 
tion into  effect.     But  in  these  two  last  meetings  as  above, 
many  proposed,  that  the  House  of  Bishops  should  have  "an 
absolute  negative"  over  the  clergy  and  laity.     To  this  Vir- 
ginia and  South  Carolina  were  firmly  opposed;  the  eastern 
states  as  firmly  supported.     The  next  General  Convention  f 
will  be  held  at  Philadelphia,  where  we  wish  to  be  repre-  ) 
sented,  but  upon  the  same  determination,  if  approved  by  the  \ 
vestries  of  our  associated  churches  in  this  state,  of  opposi-   \ 
tion  to  the  absolute  negative;  which,  more  than  probably, 
will  cause  a  secession  of  this  state  and  Virginia  from  the 
general   association.     Considering   the   situation    we   shall 
then  be  left   in,   we  are  desirous,  by  the  blessing  of  Al- 
mighty God  directing  us  in  our  choice  to  select  one  from 
the  clergy  of  this  state,  to  be  sent  forward  immediately  to 
the  northward,  and  to  obtain  authority  solely  to  ordain 
ministers  for  this  state,  as  well  as  to  renew  that  ordinance 
which  has  too  long  laid  dormant  in  our  country,  confirma- 
tion.    We  have  thought  proper,  therefore,  to  request  your 
opinion  on  the  subject,  as  we  conceive,  from  many  of  our 
rising  young  men  having  devoted  themselves  to  the  study 
of  divinity,  and  by  selecting  some  worthy  and  good  man, 
resident  in  a  parish,  and  desirous  of  taking  the  office  of  the 
ministry  upon  him,  and  having  him  ordained,  we  shall  be 
better  enabled  to  have  our  churches  provided  than  we  are   , 
at  present  by  the  clergy  which  we  have  of  late  experienced  \ 
from   Europe,   or   from    our   northern   states;    and   as   this  / 
country  will  then  be  their  native  country,  and  from  being 
accustomed  to  reside  in  it,  the  complaints  of  its  sickliness,  / 
which  have  been  the  great  arguments  of  desertion  from  C 
their  parishes,  will  in  some  measure,  if  not  totally,  lose  ' 
their  effect:  and  as,  in  that  case,  the  minister  may  have 


APPENDIX.  4 1 7 

some  property  of  his  own,  the  subscription  of  parishes 
where  small,  will  in  this  manner  be  rendered  sufficiently 
ample;  as  well  as  the  doctrines  propagated  consistent  with 
the  situation  the  Almighty  has  been  pleased  to  allot  us. 
We  beg  leave  further  to  mention,  not  with  an  intention  to 
bias  your  opinion,  but  as  a  reason  for  our  present  applica- 
tion, that  Virginia  has  pursued  the  steps  marked  out,  and 
with  the  blessing  of  heaven  upon  their  endeavors,  and 
under  the  direction  and  guardianship  of  Bishop  Madison* 
have  obtained  sixty  good  and  reputable  divines,  men,  if  but 
of  moderate  learning,  of  sound  and  good  morals,  who  have 
undertaken  the  ministry,  not  from  a  desire  of  gain,  but 
from  a  desire  of  doing  good,  and  spreading  the  effects  of 
piety,  brotherly  love,  and  charity,  in  the  several  parishes 
where  they  reside.  From  these  motives,  and  from  the  dis-^, 
tressed  situation  we  shall  be  in,  if  a  secession  takes  place1 
before  we  are  provided  with  one  to  confirm  and  ordain,  for  f 
then  we  must  either  take  what  they  are  pleased  to  send,  or 
humbly  entreat  their  favors  to  ordain  for  us,  which  might 
be  refused  after  our  secession,  we  have  presumed  to  address 
you,  hoping  when  these  important  concerns  shall  come 
before  you,  you  will  not  refuse  to  lend  us  your  aid,  both  in 
consulting  in  the  most  public  manner  the  sentiments  of  our 
brethren  at  large,  and  informing  us  of  them,  by  a  repre- 
sentative or  representatives,  at  our  next  state  convention, 
to  be  held  at  St.  Michael's  Church,  on  the  tenth  day  of 
next  February,  for  the  express  purpose  of  relinquishing  or 
carrying  the  above  measures  into  effect.  And  we  have  ap- 
pointed this  day  in  particular  (anxiously  desirous  of  being 
fully  represented),  as  it  is  the  day  previous  to  the  anniver- 
sary meeting  of  the  Revolution  society,  to  commemorate 
the  birthday  of  General  Washington,  and  conceiving  many 
gentlemen  may  be  in  town  upon  so  pleasing  an  occasion. 
And  we  are,  gentlemen,  with  all  respect  and  esteem, 

Your  humble  servants. 

*  Who  showed  himself  very  indignant  at  the  intended  compliment. 
27 


4l8  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No.  24.     Page  2 1 1. 
A  Letter  from  Bishop  Provoost. 

"NTE\v  YORK,  SEPT.  7,  1801. 

"  RIGHT  REV.  AND  DEAR  SIR, 

"  I  think  it  my  duty  to  request,  that,  as  president  of  the 
House  of  Bishops,  you  will  inform  that  venerable  body, 
that,  induced  by  ill  health,  and  some  melancholy  occur- 
rences in  my  family,  and  an  ardent  wish  to  retire  from  all 
public  employment,  I  resigned,  at  the  last  meeting  of  our 
Church  convention,  my  jurisdiction  as  bishop  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church  in  the  State  of  New  York. 
"  I  am,  with  great  regard, 

"  Dear  and  Right  Rev.  Sir, 

"  Your  affectionate  brother, 

"  SAMUEL  PROVOOST. 

"Right  Rev.  Bishop  White." 

The  House  of  Bishops  having  considered  the  subject 
brought  before  them  by  the  letter  of  Bishop  Provoost,*  and 
by  the  message  from  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  De- 
puties, touching  the  same,  can  see  no  grounds  on  which  to 
believe,  that  the  contemplated  resignation  is  consistent 
with  ecclesiastical  order,  or  with  the  practice  of  Episcopal 
i  ,  Churches*  in  any  ages,  or  with  the  tenor  of  the  office  of 
consecration.  Accordingly,  while  they  sympathize  most 
tenderly  with  their  brother,  Bishop  Provoost,  on  account  of 
that  ill  health,  and  those  melancholy  occurrences  which 
have  led  to  the  design  in  question,  they  judge  it  to  be  in- 
consistent with  the  sacred  trust  committed  to  them,  to 
j  recognize  the  bishop's  act  as  an  effectual  resignation  of  his 
'  Episcopal  jurisdiction.  Nevertheless,  being  sensible  of  the 
present  exigencies  of  the  Church  of  New  York,  and  ap- 
proving of  their  making  provision  for  the  actual  discharge 

•  See  ante,  pp.  31,  314.     Ed. 


APPENDIX.  419 

of  the  duties  of  the  Episcopacy,  the  bishops  of  this  house 
are  ready  to  consecrate  to  the  office  of  bishop,  any  person 
who  may  be  presented  to  them  with  the  requisite  testimo- 
nials from  the  General  and  State  Conventions;  and  of  whose 
religious,  moral,  and  literary  character,  due  satisfaction 
may  be  given.  But  this  house  must  be  understood  to  be 
explicit  in  their  declaration,  that  they  shall  consider  such  a 
person  as  assistant  or  co-adjutor  bishop,  during  Bishop 
Provoost's  life,  although  competent  in  point  of  character  to 
all  the  Episcopal  duties;  the  extent  in  which  the  same  shall 
be  discharged  by  him,  to  be  dependent  on  such  regulations 
as  expediency  may  dictate  to  the  Church  in  New  York, 
grounded  on  the  indisposition  of  Bishop  Provoost,  and  with 
his  concurrence. 


No.  25.     Page  219.  ,. 

Forms  of  Subscription. 

Form  in  this  Church — "I  do  believe  the  Holy  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  to  be  the  Word  of  God,  and 
to  contain  all  things  necessary  to  salvation.  And  I  do 
solemnly  engage  to  conform  to  the  doctrines  and  wor- 
ship of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  these  United 
States." 

Form  in  the  Church  of  England — The  Thirty-sixth  Can- 
on requires  the  candidates,  after  reference,  first,  to  the  royal 
supremacy;  second,  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  with 
the  Ordinal;  and  third,  to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  to  sig- 
nify his  assent  as  follows: — "I,  N.  N.,  do  willingly  and  ex 
animp_  subscribe  to  those  three  articles  above  mentioned, 
and  to  all  things  that  are  contained  in  them." 


420  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No.  26.     Page  224. 

The  house  resumed  the  consideration  of  the  matters 
brought  before  them  by  the  Rev.  Ammi  Rogers,  and  came 
to  the  following  determination  concerning  the  same. 

After  full  inquiry,  and  fair  examination  of  all  the  evi- 
dence that  could  be  procured,  it  appears  to  this  house,  that 
the  said  Ammi  Rogers  had  produced  to  the  Standing  Com- 
mittee of  New  York  (upon  the  strength  of  which  he  ob- 
tained holy  Orders)  a  certificate,  signed  with  the  name  of 
the  Rev.  Philo  Perry,  which  certificate  was  not  written  nor 
signed  by  him. 

That  the  conduct  of  the  said  Ammi  Rogers  in  the  State 
of  Connecticut,  during  his  residence  in  that  state,  since  he 
left  New  York,  has  been  insulting,  refractory,  and  schis- 
matical  in  the  highest  degree;  and,  were  it  tolerated,  would 
prove  subversive  of  all  order  and  discipline  in  the  Church; 
and  that  the  statement  which  he  made  in  justification  of 
his  conduct,  was  a  mere  tissue  of  equivocation  and  evasion, 
and,  of  course,  served  rather  to  defeat  than  to  establish  his 
purpose. 

Therefore,  this  house  do  approve  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  Church  in  Connecticut,  in  reproving  the  said  Ammi 
Rogers,  and  prohibiting  him  from  the  performance  of  any 
ministerial  duties  within  that  diocese;  and,  moreover,  are 
of  opinion,  that  he  deserves  a  severer  ecclesiastical  censure, 
that  of  degradation  from  the  ministry. 

In  regard  to  the  question,  To  what  authority  is  Mr. 
Rogers  amenable  ?  this  house  are  sensible,  that  there  not 
having  been  previously  to  the  present  convention,  any 
sufficient  provision  for  a  case  of  a  clergyman  removing 
from  one  diocese  to  another,  it  might  easily  happen,  that 
different  sentiments  would  arise  as  to  this  point.  We  are 
of  opinion,  that  Mr.  Rogers's  residence  being  in  Connecti- 
cut, it  is  to  the  authority  of  that  diocese  he  is  exclusively 
amenable.  But  as  the  imposition  practised  writh  a  view  to 
the  ministry  was  in  New  York,  we  recommend  to  the  bishop 


APPENDIX.  421 

and  Standing  Committee  of  that  state,  to  send  to  the  bishop  <: 
in  Connecticut  such  documents,  duly  attested,  of  the  meas- 
ure referred  to,  as  will  be  a  ground  of  procedure  in  that    . 
particular. 

We  further  direct  the  secretary,  to  deliver  a  copy  of  the, 
above  to  the  clerical  deputies  from  Connecticut,  and  an- 
other copy  to  the  Rev.  Ammi  Rogers.  And  we  further 
direct,  that  either  of  the  aforesaid  parties  be  permitted 
to  have  any  documents  respectively  delivered  in  by  them, 
a  copy  of  it  being  first  taken;  except  the  petition  and  affi- 
davit of  the  Rev.  Ammi  Rogers,  of  which  he  may  have  a 
copy  if  desired,  as  may  either  of  the  parties  have  of  any 
document  delivered  by  the  other  party. 


No.  27.     Page  259. 
Of  the  Homilies. 

The  House  of  Bishops,  taking  into  consideration,  that 
the  two  books  of  Homilies  are  referred  to  in  the  Thirty-fifth 
Article  of  this  Church,  as  containing  a  body  of  sound  Chris- 
tian doctrine;  and  knowing,  by  their  respective  experience, 
the  scarcity  of  the  volume,  rendering  it  difficult  for  some 
candidates  in  the  ministry  to  possess  opportunities  of  study- 
ing its  contents,  propose  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies,  to  make  it  a  standing  instruction  to  every  bishop, 
and  to  the  ecclesiastical  authority  in  every  state  destitute 
of  a  bishop,  to  be  furnished  (as  soon  as  may  be)  with  a  copy 
or  copies  of  said  work,  and  to  require  it  to  be  studied  by  all  \ 
candidates  for  the  ministry  within  their  respective  bounds;  / 
under  the  expectation,  that  when  offering  for  ordination,  the 
knowledge  of  its  contents  will  be  indispensably  required. 

This  was  concurred  in  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies. 


422  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No  28.     Page  260. 
Concerning  Posture  during  Psalmody. 

Whereas  a  diversity  of  custom  has  of  late  years  prevailed 
in  the  posture  of  ministers  and  of  the  people,  during  the 
act  of  singing  the  psalms  and  the  hymns  in  metre;  the  for-  J  (f 
mer  practice  of  sitting  during  this  part  of  the  service  grad- I  \)  < 
ually  giving  way  to  the  more  comely  posture  of  standing; 
it  is  hereby  recommended  by  this  convention,  that  it  be 
considered  as  the  duty  of  the  ministers  of  this  Church,  to 
encourage  the  use  of  the  latter  posture,  and  to  induce  the 
members  of  their  congregations,  as  circumstances  may  per- 
mit, to  do  the  same;  allowance  to  be  made  for  cases,  in 
which  it  may  be  considered  inconvenient  by  age,  or  by  in- 
firmity. Practice,  under  this  recommendation,  is  to  begin 
from  the  time  when  suitable  information  shall  have  been 
given  by  the  clergy  to  their  respective  flocks.  And  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  every  minister,  to  give  notice  of  this  recom- 
mendation to  his  congregation,  at  such  time  as  in  his  dis- 
cretion may  be  the  most  proper. 

The  carrying  into  effect  of  the  contemplated  changeA 
may  be  delayed  by  the  bishop  of  any  diocese,  or,  where   | 
there  is  no  bishop,  by  the  ecclesiastical  authority  therein,    7 
until  there  shall  have  been  time  and  opportunity  of  explain-  / 
ing  satisfactorily  the  grounds  of  the  measure. 


No.  29.     Page  261. 

Of  a  Proposal  of  new  A  nthems,  and  of  Sanction  requested  in 
favor  of  a  proposed  Book. 

The  following  proposition  was  submitted  and  agreed 
to,  and  communicated  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies. 


APPENDIX.  423 

.  .  The  House  of  Bishops  communicated  to  the  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  the  following  resolve,  and  the 
following  rule  of  the  House  of  Bishops,  to  be  entered  on 
their  journal  after  being  returned  by  the  House  of  Clerical 
and  Lay  Deputies. 

There  was  laid  before  the  house,  an  address  from  the 
Rev.  Dr.  William  Smith,  of  Connecticut,  together  with  sun- 
dry anthems,  selected  from  Holy  Scripture,  and  adapted  to 
certain  fasts  and  feasts  of  the  Church.  The  object  of  the 
address  is  to  induce  the  establishment  of  the  said  anthems 
as  parts  of  the  Liturgy. 

Whereupon,  Resolved,  That  it  is  not  expedient,  during 
this  convention,  to  go  into  a  review,  either  in  whole  or  in 
part,  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  It  could  not,  how- 
ever, but  give  satisfaction  to  the  bishops  to  recollect,  that 
anthems  taken  from  Scripture,  and  judiciously  arranged, 
may,  according  to  the  known  allowance  of  this  Church,  be 
sung  in  congregations,  at  the  discretion  of  their  respective 
ministers.  On  this  occasion,  a  question  arose,  how  far  it 
may  be  proper,  at  any  meeting  of  the  convention,  to  give 
their  sanction,  or  that  of  this  house  in  particular,  to  any 
work,  however  tending  to  religious  instruction,  or  to  the 
excitement  of  pious  affections.  In  reference  to  this  subject, 
it  is  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  bishops  present,  that  no 
such  sanction  should  be  given.  And  it  is  hereby  made  a 
rule  of  the  house,  that  if  any  application  should  be  made, 
tending  to  such  effect,  it  shall  not  be  considered  as  regu- 
larly brought  before  them. 

The  above  was  returned  by  the  House  of  Clerical  and 
Lay  Deputies,  with  their  respectful  thanks,  for  what  they 
were  pleased  to  call  the  judicious  course  adopted  by  the 
bishops,  in  reference  to  the  two  subjects. 


424  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No.  30.     Page  266. 

Concerning tJie  Identity  of  this  CJiurcJi  ivitli  the former  Church 
of  England  in  America. 

The  following  declaration  was  proposed  and  agreed  to: 
It  having  been  credibly  stated  to  the  House  of  Bishops, 
that  on  questions  in  reference  to  property  devised  before 
the  revolution,  to  congregations  belonging  to  "the  Church 
»f  England,"  and  to  uses  connected  with  that  name,  some 
doubts  have  been  entertained  in  regard  to  the  identity  of 
the  body  to  which  the  two  names  have  been  applied,  the 
house  think  it  expedient  to  make  the  declaration,  and  to 
request  the  concurrence  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies  therein — That  "  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States  of  America"  is  the  same  body  hereto- 
fore known  in  these  states  by  the  name  of  "  the  Church  of 
England";  the  change  of  name,  although  not  of  religious 
principle,  in  doctrine,  or  in  worship,  or  in  discipline,  being 
induced  by  a  characteristic  of  the  Church  of  England,  sup- 
posing the  independence  of  Christian  Churches,  under  the 
different  sovereignties,  to  which,  respectively,  their  allegi- 
ance in  civil  concerns  belongs.  But  that  when  the  sever-' 
ance  alluded  to  took  place,  and  ever  since,  this  Church  con-' 
ceives  of  herself,  as  professing  and  acting  on  the  principles 
of  the  Church  of  England,  is  evident  from  the  organization, 
of  our  conventions,  and  from  their  subsequent  proceedings, 
as  recorded  on  the  journals;  to  which,  accordingly,  this  con- 
vention refers  for  satisfaction  in  the  premises.  But  it  would 
be  contrary  to  fact,  were  any  one  to  infer,  that  the  discipline 
exercised  in  this  Church,  or  that  any  proceedings  tKerein, 
are  at  all  dependent  on  the  will  of  the  civil  or  of  the  eccle- 
siastical authority  of  any  foreign  country. 

The  above  declaration  having  been  communicated  to  the 
House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  they  returned  for  an-, 
swer,  that  they  concurred  therein. 


APPENDIX.  425 

No.  31.     Page  272. 
From  the  Journal. 

The  House  of  Bishops,  solicitous  for  the  preservation  of 
the  purity  of  the  Church,  and  the  piety  of  its  members,  are 
induced  to  impress  upon  the  clergy  the  important  duty, 
with  a  discreet  but  earnest  zeal,  of  warning  the  people 
of  their  respective  cures,  of  the  danger  of  an  indulgence 
in  those  worldly  pleasures  which  may  tend  to  withdraw 
the  affections  from  spiritual  things.  And  especially  on  the 
subject  of  gaming,  of  amusements  involving  cruelty  to  the 
brute  creajlon^  and  of  theatrical  representations,  to  which 
some  peculiar  circumstances  have  called  their  attention, — 
they  do  not  hesitate  to  express  their  unanimous  opinion, 
that  these  amusements,  as  well  from  their  licentious  ten- 
dency, as  from  the  strong  temptations  to  vice  which  they 
afford,  ought  not  to  be  frequented.  And  the  bishops  can 
not  refrain  from  expressing  their  deep  regret  at  the  infor- 
mation, that  in  some  of  our  large  cities,  so  little  respect 
is  paid  to  the  feelings  of  the  members  of  the  Church,  that 
theatrical  representations  are  fixed  for  the  evenings  of  her 
most  solemn  festivals. 


From  the  Pastoral  Letter. 

Both  to  the  clergy  and  to  the  laity  we  desire  to  say,  but 
most  pointedly  to  the  former,  that  the  Christian  profession 
exacts  a  greater  abstraction  from  the  world  than  that  which 
consists  in  the  abstaining  from  acknowledged  sin.  There 
are  practices  so  nearly  allied,  and  so  easily  abused  to  it, 
that  we  conceive  of  a  professor  of  religion  in  duty  bound 
either  not  to  countenance  them  in  the  least  degree;  or,  as 
is  allowable  in  regard  to  some  of  the  matters  contemplated, 
to  avoid  the  so  employing  of  time,  and  the  so  lavishing  of 
affection,  as  puts  into  a  state  of  sin,  although  not  necessa- 


426  MEMOIRS    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

rily  belonging  to  the  subject.  We  would  be  far  from  an  en- 
deavor after  an  abridgment  of  Christian  liberty.  But  we 
can  not  forget,  that  in  a  list  of  the  classes  of  evil  livers, 
there  is  introduced  the  description  of  persons  who  are 
"lovers  of  pleasure  more  than  lovers  of  God";  nor,  in 
respect  to  the  female  professors  of  religion  in  particular, 
the  admonition,  that  "she  who  liveth  in  pleasure  is  dead 
while  she  liveth."  We  are  aware  of  the  difficulty  of  draw- 
ing the  line  between  the  use  of  the  world  and  the  abuse  of 
it:  that  being  conceived  of  by  different  persons  equally 
pious  and  virtuous,  according  to  the  diversity  of  natural 
temperament,  and  of  the  states  of  society  in  which  they 
have  been  placed  by  education  or  by  habit:  but  we  know, 
that  where  the  conscience  can  reconcile  itself  to  the  draw- 
ing as  near  to  the  territory  of  sin,  as  it  can  persuade  itself 
to  be  consistent  with  the  still  standing  on  secure  ground, 
deadness  to  spiritual  good  at  the  best,  but  more  commonly 
subjection  to  its  opposite  is  the  result. 

In  speaking  of  subjects  of  the  above  description,  we 
would  not  be  understood  to  class  among  them  any  practice 
which  is  either  immoral  in  itself,  or  so  customarily  accom- 
panied by  immorality,  that  the  one  is  necessarily  counte*- 
nanced  with  the  other.  Of  the  former  description,  is  gam- 
ing in  all  the  variety  of  its  exercise:  and  the  like  may  be 
said  of  whatever  involves  cruelty  to  the  lower  animals  of 
the  creation.  If  the  same  can  not  be  affirmed  of  works  of 
fiction,  and  of  putting  speeches  into  the  mouths  of  feigned 
characters,  for  the  purpose  of  instruction  or  of  entertain- 
ment; yet,  as  the  question  is  applicable  to  the  exhibitions 
of  the  theatre,  such  as  they  have  been  in  every  age,  and 
are  at  present;  we  do  not  hesitate  to  declare,  unanimously, 
our  opinion,  that  it  is  a  foul  source  of  very  extensive  cor- 
ruption. We  lay  little  stress  on  the  plea,  that  it  is  a  mat- 
ter practicable  in  social  institutions,  to  purge  the  subject 
from  the  abuses  which  have  been  attached  to  it.  When 
this  shall  have  been  accomplished,  it  will  be  time  to  take 
another  ground.  But,  in  truth,  we  are  not  persuaded  of 


APPENDIX.  427 

the  possibility  of  the  thing,  when  we  consider  that  the 
prominent  and  most  numerous  patrons  of  the  stage  are 
always  likely  to  be'  the  least  disposed  to  the  seriousness 
which  should  enter  into  whatever  is  designed  to  discrim- 
inate between  innocence  and  guilt.  While  the  opinions 
and  the  passions  of  such  persons  shall  continue  to  serve  the 
purpose  of  a  looking-glass,  by  which  the  exhibited  charac- 
ters are  to  be  adjusted  to  the  taste  of  so  great  a  proportion 
of  the  public,  we  despair  of  seeing  the  stage  rescued  from 
the  disgusting  effusions  of  profaneness  and  obscenity;  and 
much  less  of  that  mean  of  corruption,  more  insinuating 
than  any  other — the  exhibiting  of  what  is  radically  base, 
in  alliance  with  properties  captivating  to  the  imagination. 

While  we  address  this  alike  to  the  clergy  and  to  the 
laity,  we  consider  it  as  especially  hostile  to  the  usefulness 
of  the  former.  And  even  in  regard  to  some  matters  con- 
fessed to  be  innocent  in  themselves,  their  innocency  may 
depend  much  on  many  circumstances,  and  of  professional 
character  among  others.  The  ear  of  a  clergyman  should 
always  be  open  to  a  call  to  the  most  serious  duties  of  his 
station.  Whatever  n&ay  render  it  difficult  to  his  own  mind 
to  recur  to  those  duties  with  the  solemnity  which  they 
require,  or  may  induce  an  opinion  in  others,  that  such  a 
recurrence  must  be  unwelcome  to  him  from  some  enjoy- 
ment not  congenial  with  holy  exercise,  ought  to  be  de- 
clined by  him.  If  it  be  a  sacrifice,  the  making  of  it  is 
exacted  by  what  ought  to  be  his  ruling  wish,  the  serving 
of  God,  and  the  being  useful  to  his  fellow-men,  in  the  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  the  ministry. 


1 


428  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

No.  32.     Page  274. 
Acts  of  the  Convention  of  1785. 

A  General  Ecclesiastical  Constitution  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States  of  America. 

Whereas,  in  the  course  of  Divine  Providence,  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America 
is  become  independent  of  all  foreign  authority,  civil  and 
ecclesiastical: — 

And  whereas,  at  a  meeting  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies 
of  the  said  Church,  in  sundry  of  the  said  states,  viz.,  in  the 
States  of  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  New 
York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  and  Maryland, 
held  in  the  City  of  New  York,  on  the  6th  and  7th  days  of 
October,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1784,  it  was  recommended 
to  this  Church  in  the  said  states  represented  as  aforesaid, 
and  proposed  to  this  Church  in  the  states  not  represented, 
that  they  should  send  deputies  to  a  convention  to  be  held 
in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  on  the  Tuesday  before  the  feast 
of  St.  Michael  in  this  present  year,  in  order  to  unite  in  a 
constitution  of  ecclesiastical  government,  agreeably  to  cer- 
tain fundamental  principles,  expressed  in  the  said  recom- 
mendation and  proposal: — • 

And  whereas,  in  consequence  of  the  said  recommenda- 
tion and  proposal,  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  have  been 
duly  appointed  from  the  said  Church,  in  the  States  of  New 
York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  Maryland,  Vir- 
ginia, and  South  Carolina: — 

The  said  deputies  being  now  assembled,  and  taking  into 
consideration  the  importance  of  maintaining  uniformity  in 
doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship  in  the  said  Church,  do 
hereby  determine  and  declare, 

i.  That  there  shall  be  a  General  Convention  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica, which  shall  be  held  in  the  City  of  Philadelphia,  on  the 


APPENDIX.  429 

third  Tuesday  in  June,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1786,  and 
forever  after,  once  in  three  years,  on  the  third  Tuesday 
of  June,  in  such  place  as  shall  be  determined  by  the  con- 
vention; and  special  meetings  may  be  held  at  such  other 
times,  and  in  such  place,  as  shall  be  hereafter  provided  for; 
and  this  Church,  in  a  majority  of  the  states  aforesaid,  shall 
be  represented  before  they  shall  proceed  to  business;  ex- 
cept that  the  representation  of  this  Church  from  two  states, 
shall  be  sufficient  to  adjourn;  and  in  all  business  of  the 
convention,  freedom  of  debate  shall  be  allovVed. 

2.  There  shall  be  a  representation  of  both  clergy  and 
laity  of  the  Church  in  each  state,  which  shall  consist  of  one 
or  more  deputies, 'not  exceeding  four  of  each  order;  and  in 
all  questions,  the  said  Church  in  each  state  shall  have  one  5 

__. _    •  J" — """~"  — — — •—•—  — ^_   \ 

yptej  and  a  majority  of  suffrages  shall  be  conclusive. 

3.  In  the  said  Church,  in  every  state  represented  in  this 
convention,  there  shall  be  a  convention  consisting  of  the 
clergy  and  lay  deputies  of  the  congregations. 

4.  "  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Administration 
of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  the 
Church,  according  to  the  use  of  the  Church  of  England," 
shall  be  continued  to  be  used  by  this  Church,  as  the  same 
is  altered  by  this  convention,  in  a  certain  instrument  of 
writing,  passed  by  their  authority,   entitled,  "Alterations 
of  the  Liturgy  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America,  in  order  to  render  the  same  con- 
formable to  the  American  Revolution  and  the  Constitutions 
of  the  respective  States." 

5.  In  every  state  where  there  shall  be  a  bishop  duly 
consecrated  and  settled,  and  who  shall  have  acceded  to 
the  articles  of  this  general  ecclesiastical  constitution,  he 
shall  be  considered  as  a  member  of  the  convention,  ex~ 
officio. 

6.  The  bishop,  or  bishops,  in  every  state  shall  be  chosen 
agreeably  to  such  rules  as  shall  be  fixed  by  the  respective1 
conventions;  and  every  bishop  of  this  Church  shall  confine 
the  exercises  of  his  Episcopal  office  to  his  proper  jurisdic- 


430  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

tion,  unless  requested  to  ordain  or  confirm  by  any  Church 
destitute  of  a  bishop. 

7.  A  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  any  of  the  United 
States,  not  now  represented,  may,  at  any  time  hereafter,  be 
admitted,  on  acceding  to  the  articles  of  this  union. 

8.  Every  clergyman,  whether  bishop,  presjby_ter,  or  dea- 
con, shall  be  amenable  to  the  authority  of  the  convention  in 
the  state  to  which  he  belongs,  so  far  as  relates  to  suspension  or 
removal  from  orifice;  and  the  convention  in  each  state  shall  in- 
stitute rules  for  their  cojiduct,  and  an  equitable  mode  .oft  rial. 

9.  And  whereas,  it  is  represented  to  this  convention,  to 
be  the  desire  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  these 
states,  that  there  maybe  further  alterations  of  the  Liturgy, 
than  such  as  are  made  necessary  by  the  American  revolu- 
tion; therefore,  the  "  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Adminis- 
tration of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies 
of  the  Church,  according  to  the  use  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land," as  altered  by  an  instrument  of  writing,  passed  under 
the  authority  of  this  convention,  entitled,  "  Alterations  in 
the  Book  of  Common   Prayer^  and  Administration  of  the 
Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church, 
according  to  the  use  of  the  Church  of  England,  proposed  and 
recommended  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America,"  shall  be  used  in  this  Church,  wjiejj  ( 
the  same  shall  have  been  ratified  by  the  conventions  which  ( 
have  respectively  sent  deputies  to  this  General  CoftVention.  J 

10.  No  person  shall  be  ordained  or  permitted  to  officiate 
as  a  minister  in  this  Church,  until  he  shall  have  subscribed 
the  following  declaration:  "I  do  believe  the  Holy  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  to  be  the  Word  of  God,  and 
to  contain  all  things  necessary   to   salvation:   And    I   do 
solemnly  engage  to  conform  to  the  doctrines  and  worship 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  as  settled  and  deter- 
mined in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Administration 
of  the  Sacraments,  set  forth  by  the  General  Convention  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  these  United  States." 

ir.  This  general  ecclesiastical  constitution,   when  rati- 


APPENDIX.  431 

fied  by  the_Church_in  the  different  states,  shall  be  consid- 
ered as  fundamental;  and  shall  be  unalterable  by  the  con- 
vention of  the  Church  in  any  state. 


Alterations  agreed  on  and  confirmed  in  Convention,  for  ren- 
dering the  Liturgy  conformable  to  the  Principles  of  the 
A  merican  Revolution,  and  the  Constitutions  of  the  several 
States. 

1st.  That  in  the  suffrages,  after  the  Creed,  instead  of  O 
Lord,  save  the  king,  be  said,  O  Lord,  bless  and  preserve  these 
United  States. 

2d.  That  the  prayer  for  the  royal  family,  in  the  Morn- 
ing and  Evening  Service,  be  omitted. 

3d.  That  in  the  Litany  the  fifteenth,  sixteenth,  seven- 
teenth, and  eighteenth  petitions  be  omitted;  and  that  in- 
stead of  the  twentieth  and  twenty-first  petitions  be  sub- 
stituted the  following — that  it  may  please  thee  to  endue  the 
Congress  of  these  United  States,  and  all  others  in  authority, 
legislative,  executive,  and  judicial,  with  grace,  wisdom,  arid 
understanding,  to  execute  justice  and  maintain  truth. 

4th.  That  when  the  Litany  is  not  said,  the  prayer  for  the 
high  court  of  parliament  may  be  thus  altered — '''Most  gra- 
cious God,  we  humbly  beseech  thee,  as  for  these  United  States 
in  general,  so  especially  for  their  delegates  in  Congress,  that 
thou  wouldest  be  pleased  to  direct  and  prosper  all  their  con- 
sultations to  the  advancement  of  thy  glory,  the  good  of  thy 
Church,  the  safety,  honor  and  welfare  of  thy  people;  that  all 
things  may  be  so  ordered  and  settled  by  their  endeavors,  upon 
the  best  and  surest  foundations,  that  peace  and  happiness, 
truth  and  justice,  religion  and  piety,  may  be  established 
among  us  for  all  generations"  etc.,  to  the  end:  and  the 
prayer  for  the  kings  majesty,  as  follows,  viz. — O  Lord,  our 
heavenly  Father,  the  high  and  mighty  Ruler  of  the  imiverse, 
who  dost  from  thy  throne  behold  all  the  dwellers  upon  earth; 
we  most  heartily  beseech  thee,  with  thy  favor,  to  behold  all  in 
authority,  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  in  these  United 


432  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

States;  and  so  replenish  them  with  the  grace  of  thy  Holy 
Spirit,  t/iat  they  may  alway  incline  to  thy  will,  and  walk  in 
thy  way.  Endue  them  plenteous ly  with  heavenly  gifts;  grant 
them  in  health  and  wealth  long  to  live,  and  that  after  tliis 
life,  they  may  attain  everlasting  joy  and  felicity,  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  A  men. 

5th.  That  the  first  collect  for  the  King  in  the  Commun- 
ion Service  be  omitted;  and  that  the  second  be  altered  as 
follows — instead  of  "  the  hearts  of  kings  are  in  thy  rules  and 
governance" — be  said,  "  the  hearts  of  all  rulers  are  in  thy 
governance;"  and  instead  of  the  words — "heart  of  George, 
thy  servant,"  insert — "  so  to  direct  the  rulers  of  these  states" 
etc.,  changing  the  singular  pronouns  to  the  plural. 

7th.^That  in  the  answer  in  the  Catechism  to  the  ques- 
tion— "  What  is  thy  duty  towards  thy  neighbor?"  for  "  to 
honor  and  obey  the  king"  be  substituted — "  to  honor  and 
obey  my  civil  rulers,  to  submit  myself"  etc. 

8th.  That  instead  of  the  observations  of  the  $th  of  No- 
vember, the  3<Dth  of  January,  the  29th  of  May,  and  the  2$th 
of  October,  the  following  service  be  used  on  the  4th  of  July, 
being  the  anniversary  of  independence. 

9th.  That  in  the  forms  of  prayer  to  be  used  at  sea,  in 
the  prayer  "  O  eternal  God,"  etc.,  instead  of  those  words — 
"  unto  our  most  gracious  sovereign  Lord  King  George  and 
his  kingdoms"  be  inserted  the  words — "  the  United  States 
of  America; "  and  that  instead  of  the  word  "island"  be  in- 
serted the  word  "country";  and  that  in  the  collect,  "O 
Almighty  God,  the  Sovereign  Commander,"  etc.,  be  omitted 
the  words — "  the  honor  of  our  sovereign,"  and  the  words 
"  the  honor  of  our  country  "  inserted. 


Service  for  the  Fourth  of  July. 
Wilh  the  Sentences  be/ore  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer. 

The  Lord  hath  been  mindful  of  us,  and  he  shall  bless  us, 
he  shall  bless  them  that  fear  the  Lord,  both  small  and 


APPENDIX.  433 

great.  O  that  men  would  therefore  praise  the  Lord  for  his 
goodness,  and  declare  the  wonders  that  he  doeth  for  the 
children  of  men. 


Hymn  instead  of  the   Veniie. 

My  song  shall  be  alway  of  the  loving-kindness  of  the 
Lord:  with  my  mouth  will  I  ever  be  showing  his  truth  from 
one  generation  to  another.  Psalm  Ixxxix.  i. 

The  merciful  and  gracious  Lord  hath  so  done  his  mar- 
vellous works,  that  they  ought  to  be  had  in  remembrance. 
Psalm  cxi.  4. 

Who  can  express  the  noble  acts  of  the  Lord,  or  show 
forth  all  his  praise.  Psalm  cvi.  2. 

The  works  of  the  Lord  are  great,  sought  out  of  all  them 
that  have  pleasure  therein.  Psalm  cxi.  2. 

For  he  will  not  always  be  chiding;  neither  keepeth  he 
his  anger  forever.  Psalm  ciii.  9. 

He  hath  not  dealt  with  us  after  our  sins;  nor  rewarded 
us  according  to  our  wickedness.  Verse  10. 

For  look  how  high  the  heaven  is  in  comparison  of  the 
earth;  so  great  is  his  mercy  toward  them  that  fear  him. 
Verse  n. 

Yea,  like  as  a  father  pitieth  his  own  children;  even  so  is 
the  Lord  merciful  unto  them  that  fear  him.  Verse  13. 

Thou,  O  God,  hast  proved  us;  thou  also  hast  tried  us, 
like  as  silver  is  tried.  Psalm  Ixvi.  9. 

Thou  didst  remember  us  in  our  low  estate,  and  redeem 
us  from  our  enemies ;  for  thy  mercy  endureth  forever. 
Psalm  cxxxvi.  23,  24. 

Proper  Psalms  118,  except  ver.  10,  II,  12,  13,  22,  23, 
to  conclude  with  ver.  24. 

1st  Lesson,  Deut.  viii.  2d  Lesson,  Thess.  v.  i2-23d, 
both  inclusive. 


434  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH, 

Collect  for  the  Day. 

Almighty  God,  who  hast  in  all  ages  showed  forth  thy 
power  and  mercy  in  the  wonderful  preservation  of  thy 
Church,  and  in  the  protection  of  every  nation  and  people 
professing  thy  holy  and  eternal  truth,  and  putting  their 
sure  trust  in  thee;  we  yield  thee  our  unfeigned  thanks  and 
praise  for  all  thy  public  mercies,  and  more  especially  for 
that  signal  and  wonderful  manifestation  of  thy  providence 
which  we  commemorate  this  day;  wherefore  not  unto  us, 
O  Lord,  not  unto  us,  but  unto  thy  Name  be  ascribed  all 
honor  and  glory,  in  all  Churches  of  the  saints,  from  genera- 
tion to  generation,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  Amen. 

Thanksgiving  for  the  Day. 

O  God,  whose  Name  is  excellent  in  all  the  earth,  and 
thy  glory  above  the  heavens;  who,  as  on  this  day,  didst  in- 
spire and  direct  the  hearts  of  our  delegates  in  Congress,  to 
lay  the  perpetual  foundations  of  peace,  liberty,  and  safety; 
we  bless  and  adore  thy  glorious  Majesty,  for  this  thy  loving- 
kindness  and  providence.  And  we  humbly  pray,  that  the 
devout  sense  of  this  signal  mercy  may  renew  and  increase 
in  us  a  spirit  of  love  and  thankfulness  to  thee,  its  only 
Author,  a  spirit  of  peaceable  submission  to  the  laws  and 
government  of  our  country,  and  a  spirit  of  fervent  zeal  for 
our  holy  religion,  which  thou  hast  preserved  and  secured  to 
us  and  our  posterity.  May  we  improve  these  inestimable 
blessings  for  the  advancement  of  religion,  liberty,  and 
science  throughout  this  land,  till  the  wilderness  and  soli- 
tary place  be  glad  through  us,  and  the  desert  rejoice  and 
blossom  as  the  rose.  This  we  beg  through  the  merits  of 
Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour.  Amen* 


*  The  Epistle  and  the  Gospel  were  added  by  the  Committee,  agreeably  to  an 
authority  which  they  conceived  to  be  vested  in  them. 


APPENDIX.  435 

Alterations  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  Administra- 
tion of  the  Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of 
the  Church,  according  to  the  use  of  the  Church  of  England, 
proposed  and  recommended  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
•  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America. 

The  order  for  morning  and  evening  service  daily, 
throughout  the  year. 

ist.  The  following  sentences  of  Scripture  are  ordered  to 
be  prefixed  to  the  usual  sentences,  viz. — 

The  Lord  is  in  his  holy  temple;  let  all  the  earth  keep 
silence  before  him.  Hab.  ii.  20. 

From  the  rising  of  the  sun  even  unto  the  going  down  of 
the  same,  my  name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gentiles; 
and  in  every  place  incense  shall  be  offered  unto  my  name, 
and  a  pure  offering;  for  my  name  shall  be  great  among  the 
Heathen,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts.  Mai.  i.  11. 

Let  the  words  of  my  mouth,  and  the  meditation  of  my 
heart,  be  alway  acceptable  in  thy  sight,  O  Lord,  my  strength 
and  my  Redeemer.  Psalm  xix.  14. 

2d.  That  the  rubric  preceding  the  absolution  be  altered 
thus — "  A  declaration  to  be  made  by  the  minister  alone, 
standing,  concerning  the  forgiveness  of  sins." 

3d.  That  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  word  "who"  be  sub- 
stituted in  the  room  of  "which,"  and  that  "those  who  tres- 
pass "  stand  instead  of  "  them  that  trespass." 

4th.  That  the  "  Gloria  Patri"  be  omitted  after  the  "  O 
come  let  us  sing"  etc.,  and  in  every  other  place,  where,  by 
the  present  rubric  it  is  ordered  to  be  inserted,  to  "the  end 
of  the  "  reading  psalms;  when  shall  be  said  or  sung  "  Gloria 
Patri,"  etc.,  or,  "  Glory  be  to  God  on  high,  and  on  earth  peace, 
good  will  towards  men,"  etc.,  at  the  discretion  of  the  min- 
ister. 

5th.  That  in  the  "  Te  Deum  "  instead  of  "honorable"  it 
be  "  adorable,  true,  and  only  Son;"  and  instead  of  "  didst  not 
abhor  the  Virgin's  womb"  "didst  humble  thyself  to  be  born 
of  a  Virgin." 


436  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

6th.  That  until  a  proper  selection  of  psalms  be  made, 
each  minister  be  allowed  to  use  such  as  he  may  choose. 

jth.  That  the  same  liberty  be  allowed  respecting  the 
lessons. 

8th.  That  the  article  in  "the  Apostles'  Creed,"  "  he  de- 
scended into  hell"  be  omitted. 

9th.  That  the  Athanasian  and  the  Nicene  Creeds  be  en- 
tirely omitted. 

loth.  That  after  the  response,  "  and  with  tliy  Spirit"  all 
be  omitted  to  the  words  "  O  Lord,  show  thy  mercy  upon  us;" 
which  the  minister  shall  pronounce,  still  kneeling. 

nth.  That  in  the  suffrage,  "make  thy  chosen  people  joy- 
ful" the  word  "chosen"  be  omitted;  and  also  the  following 
suffrages,  to  "  O  God,  make  clean  our  hearts  within  us." 

12th.  That  the  rubric  after  these  words,  "and  take  not 
thy  Holy  Spirit  from  us"  be  omitted.  Then  the  two  collects 
to  be  said:  in  the  collect  for  grace,  the  words  "  be  ordered" 
to  be  omitted;  and  the  word  "be"  inserted,  instead  of  "to 
do  alway  that  is." 

1 3th.  In  the  collect  "for  the  clergy  and  people"  read — 
"Almighty  and  everlasting  God,  send  down  upon  all  bishops 
and  other  pastors,  and  the  congregations  committed  to  their 
charge,"  etc.,  to  the  end. 

I4th.  [Here  is  an  erasure  from  the  manuscript:  the  ar- 
ticle being  found  a  repetition  of  part  of  the  thirteenth.*] 

1 5th.  That  the  Lord's  Prayer  -after  the  Litany,  and  the 
subsequent  rubric,  be  omitted. 

i6th.  That  the  short  Litany  be  read  as  follows — "Son  of 
God,  we  beseech  thee  to  hear  us.  Son  of  God,  we  beseech  thee 
to  hear  us.  O  Lamb  of  God,  that  takest  away  the  sins  of  t lie 
world,  grant  us  thy  peace.  O  Christ,  hear  us.  O  Christ, 
hear  us.  Lord,  have  mercy  upon  us,  and  deal  not  with  us  ac- 
cording to  our  sins,  neither  reward  us  according  to  our  iniqui- 
ties." After  which,  omit  the  words — "  Let  us  Pray" 

i/th.  That  the  Gloria  Patri,  after  O  Lord,  arise,  etc.,  be 

*  Should  read  fourth.    Ed. 


APPENDIX.  437 

omitted;  as  also  "Let  us  pray"  after  "we  put  our  trust  in 
thee." 

i8th.  That  in  the  following  prayer,  instead  of  "right- 
eously have  deserved"  it  be  "justly  have  deserved" 

iQth.  That  in  the  first  warning  for  the  communion,  the 
word  "damnation"  following  the  words  "increase  your"  be 
read  "condemnation";  and  the  two  paragraphs  after  these 
words — "or  else  come  not  to  that  holy  table"  be  omitted, 
and  the  following  one  be  read,  "and  if  there  be  any  of  you 
who,  by  these  means,  can  not  quiet  their  conscience"  etc.  The 
words  "  learned  and  discreet"  epithets  given  to  the  minister, 
to  be  also  omitted. 

2Oth.  In  the  exhortation  to  the  communion,  let  it  run 
thus — "for  as  the  benefit  is  great,  etc.,  to  drink  his  blood,  so 
is  the  danger  great,  if  we  receive  the  same  unworthily. 
Judge  therefore  yourselves"  etc. 

2 ist.  That  in  the  rubric  preceding  the  absolution,  instead 
of  "pronounce  this  absolution"  it  be — "then  shall  the  minis- 
ter stand  up,  and  turning  to  the  people,  say"  etc. 

22d.  That  in  the  baptism  of  infants,  parents  may  be  ad- 
mitted as  sponsors. 

23d.  That  the  minister,  in  speaking  to  the  sponsors,  in- 
stead of  these  words,  "vouchsafe  to  release  Jiim"  etc.,  say — 
"release  him  from  sin;"  and  in  the  second  prayer,  instead  of 
"remission  of  his  sins,"  read — remission  of  sin." 

24th.  That  in  the  questions  addressed  to  the  sponsors, 
and  the  answers,  instead  of  the  present  form,  it  be  as  follows 
— "the  sinful  desires  of  the  flesh." 

25th.  "Dost  thou  believe  the  articles  of  the  Christian  faith, 
as  contained  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  ivilt  thou  endeavor  to 
have  this  child  instructed  accordingly?"  Answer:  " I  do 
believe  them,  and  by  God's  help  will  endeavor  so  to  do" 

"  Wilt  thou  endeavor  to  have  him  brought  up  in  the  fear  of 
God,  and  to  obey  God's  holy  will  and  commandments  ?  "  An- 
swer: "/  will,  by  God's  assistance"  * 

26th.  That  the  sign  of  the  cross  may  be  omitted,  if  par- 
ticularly desired  by  the  sponsors  or  parents,  and  the  prayer 


438  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

to  be*  thus  altered  (by  the  direction  of  a  short  rubric)  "  We 
receive  this  child  into  the  congregation  of  Christ's  flock;  and 
fray  tliat  hereafter  he  may  never  be  ashamed"  etc.,  to  the 
end. 

2/th.  That  the  address — "seeing  now,  dearly  beloved" 
etc.,  be  omitted. 

28th.  That  the  prayer  after  the  Lord's  Prayer  be  thus 
changed — "we yield  thee  our  hearty  thanks,"  etc.,  to  "  receive 
this  infant  as  thine  (nun  child  by  baptism,  and  to  incorpor- 
ate him,"  etc. 

29th.  That  in  the  following  exhortation,  the  words  "to 
renounce  the  devil  and  all  his  ivorks"  and  in  the  charge  to 
the  sponsors,  the  words  "vulgar  tongue,"  be  omitted. 

3Oth.  That  the  forms  of  private  baptism  and  confirma- 
tion be  made  conformable  to  these  alterations. 

3ist.  That  in  the  exhortation  before  matrimony,  all  be- 
tween these  words,  "  holy  matrimony,  and  therefore  if  any 
man,"  etc.,  be  omitted. 

32d.  That  the  words  "  I  plight  thee  my  troth"  be  omitted 
in  both  places;  and  also  the  words — "with  my  body  I  thee 
worship;  "  and  also — "pledged  their  troth  either  to  other" 

33d.  That  all  after  the  Blessing  be  omitted. 

34th.  In  the  burial  service,  instead  of  the  two  psalms, 
take  the  following  verses  of  both,  viz.,  Psalm  xxxix.  7,  8,  9, 
12,  13,  and  Psalm  xc.  13.  In  the  rubric,  the  word  "  unbap- 
tized"  to  be  omitted. 

In  the  declaration  and  forms  of  interment,  beginning — 
"forasmuch  as?  etc.,  insert  the  following — "Forasmuch  as 
it  hath  pleased  A  Imighty  God,  in  his  wise  providence,  to  take 
out  of  this  world  the  soul  of  our  deceased  brother  [sister],  we 
therefore  commit  his  [her]  body  to  the  ground — earth  to  earth, 
ashes  to  ashes,  dust  to  dust;  looking  for  the  general  resurrec- 
tion in  the  last  day,  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come,  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  at  whose  second  coming,  in  glorious 
majesty,  to  judge  the  world,  the  earth  and  the  sea  shall  give 
up  their  dead;  and  the  corruptible  bodies  of  those  who  sleep 
in  him,  shall  be  changed,  and  made  like  unto  his  glorious  body, 


APPENDIX.  439 

according  to  the  mighty  working,  whereby  he  is  able  to  subdue 
all  things  unto  himself. 

In  the  sentence  "/  Jieard  a  voice"  etc.,  insert  "  ivho  "  for 
"which" 

The  prayer  following  the  Lord's  Prayer  to  be  omitted. 
In  the  next  collect,  leave  out  the  words  "  as  our  hope  is, 
this  our  brother  doth."  For  "them  that"  insert  "those 
who." 

35th.  In  the  visitation  of  the  sick,  instead  of  the  Absolu- 
tion as  it  now  stands,  insert  the  declaration  of  forgiveness 
which  is  appointed  in  the  Communion  Service;  or,  either  of 
the  collects  which  are  taken  from  the  commination  office, 
and  appropriated  to  Ash  Wednesday,  may  be  used. 

In  the  psalm,  omit  the  third,  sixth,  eighth,  ninth,  and 
eleventh  verses.  In  the  commendatory  prayer,  for  "  miser- 
able and  naughty"  say  "vain  and  miserable"  Strike  out 
the  word  "purged" 

In  the  " prayer  for  persons  troubled  in  mind"  omit  all 
that  stands  between  the  words  "  afflicted  servant"  and  "his 
soul  is  full"  etc.,  and  instead  thereof  say  "afflicted  servant, 
whose  soul  is  full  of  trouble"  and  strike  out  the  particle 
"  but"  and  proceed,  "  O  merciful  God"  etc. 

36th.  A  form  of  prayer  and  visitation  of  prisoners  for 
notorious  crimes,  and  especially  persons  under  sentence 
of  death,  being  much  wanted,  the  form  entitled  "  Prayers 
for  Persons  under  Sentence  of  Death,  agreed  on  in  the 
synod  of  the  archbishops  and  bishops,  and  the  rest  of  the 
clergy  of  Ireland,  at  Dublin,  in  the  year  i/n,"  as  it  now 
stands  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  of  the  Church  of 
Ireland,  is  agreed  upon,  and  ordered  to  be  adopted,  with 
the  following  alterations,  viz. — 

For  the  Absolution  take  the  same  declaration  of  forgive- 
ness, or  either  of  the  collects  above  directed  for  the  visita- 
tion of  the  sick.  The  short  collect  "  O  Saviour  of  the 
world"  etc.,  to  be  left  out;  and  for  the  word  "frailness"  say 
"frailty" 

3/th.  In  the  Catechism,  besides  the  alteration  respect- 


440  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

ing  civil  rulers,  alter  as  follows,  viz.,  "  What  is  your  name? 
N.  M.  When  did  you  receive  this  name  ?  I  received  it  in 
baptism,  whereby  I  became  a  member  of  the  Christian  Churcli. 
What  was  promised  for  you  in  baptism  ?  That  I  should  be 
instructed  to  believe  the  Christian  faith,  as  contained  in  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  and  to  obey  God's  holy  will,  and  keep  his 
commandments. 

"Dost  tliou  tit  ink  tJiou  art  bound  to  believe  all  the  articles 
of  the  Christian  faith,  as  contained  in  the  Creed,  and  to 
obey  God's  holy  will,  and  keep  his  commandments  ?  Yes, 
verily"  etc. 

Instead  of  the  words  "verily,  and  indeed  taken"  say — 
"spiritually  taken." 

Answer  to  the  question  "  How  many  sacraments  ?  Two, 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper." 

38th.  Instead  of  a  particular  service  for  the  churching  of 
women,  and  psalms,  the  following  special  prayer  is  to  be 
introduced,  after  the  general  thanksgiving,  viz.  This  to 
be  said  when  any  woman  desires  to  return  thanks.  "  O 
A  Imighty  God,  we  give  thee  most  Jiumblc  and  hearty  thanks, 
for  that  thou  hast  been  graciously  pleased  to  preserve  this 
woman  thy  servant,  througJi  the  great  pains  and  perils  of 
child-birth.  Incline  her,  we  beseech  thee,  to  show  forth  her 
thankfulness,  for  this  thy  great  mercy,  not  only  wit/i  her  lips, 
but  by  a  holy  and  virtuous  life.  Be  pleased,  O  God,  so  to 
establish  her  health,  that  she  may  lead  the  remainder  of  her 
days  to  thy  honor  and  glory,  through  Jcsits  Christ  our  Lord. 
Amen" 

39th.  The  commination  office  for  Ash  Wednesday  to  be 
discontinued,  and  therefore  the  three  collects,  the  first  be- 
ginning— "  O  Lord,  we  beseech  thee" — 2d.  "  O  most  mighty 
God" — 3d.  "  Turn  us,  O  good  Lord,"  shall  be  continued 
among  the  occasional  prayers;  and  used  after  the  collect 
on  Ash  Wednesday,  and  on  such  other  occasions  as  the 
minister  shall  think  fit. 


APPENDIX.  441 

Articles  of  Religion. 
i.    Of  Faith  in  the  Holy  Trinity. 

There  is  but  one  living,  true,  and  eternal  God,  the  Fa- 
ther Almighty;  without  body,  parts,  or  passions;  of  infinite 
power,  wisdom,  and  goodness;  the  Maker  and  Preserver 
of  all  things  both  visible  and  invisible:  and  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all 
worlds,  very  and  true  God;  who  came  down  from  heaven, 
took  man's  nature  in  the  womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin,  of 
her  substance,  and  was  God  and  man  in  one  Person,  where- 
of is  one  Christ;  who  truly  suffered,  was  crucified,  dead,  and 
buried,  to  reconcile  his  Father  to  us,  and  to  be  a  sacrifice  for 
the  sins  of  all  men;  he  rose  again  from  death,  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  there  sitteth  until  he  shall  return  to  judge  the 
world  at  the  last  day:  and  one  Holy  Spirit,  the  Lord  and 
Giver  of  life,  of  the  same  divine  nature  with  the  Father  and 
the  Son. 

2.    Of  the  Sufficiency  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  for  Salvation. 

Holy  Scripture  containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salva- 
tion: so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  therein,  nor  may  be 
proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  required  of  any  man,  that  it 
should  be  believed  as  an  article  of  the  faith,  or  be  thought 
requisite  or  necessary  to  salvation.  In  the  name  of  the 
Holy  Scripture  we  do  understand  those  canonical  books  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament,  of  whose  authority  was  never 
any  doubt  in  the  Church. 

Of  the  Names  and  Numbers  of  the  Canonical  Books. 

Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy, 
Joshua,  Judges,  Ruth,  The  First  Book  of  Samuel,  The 
Second  Book  of  Samuel,  The  First  Book  of  Kings,  The 
Second  Book  of  Kings,  The  First  Book  of  Chronicles,  The 


442  MEMOIRS  OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Second  Book  of  Chronicles,  The  First  Book  of  Esdras, 
The  Second  Book  of  Esdras,  The  Book  of  Hester,  The 
Book  of  Job,  The  Psalms,  The  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes  or 
Preacher,  Cantica  or  Songs  of  Solomon,  Four  Prophets  the 
greater,  Twelve  Prophets  the  less. 

And  the  other  books  (as  Hierome  saith)  the  Church  doth 
read  for  example  of  life,  and  instruction  of  manners;  but 
yet  doth  it  not  apply  them  to  establish  any  doctrine;  such 
are  these  following:— 

The  Third  Book  of  Esdras,  The  Fourth  Book  of  Esdras, 
The  Book  of  Tobias,  The  Book  of  Judith,  The  rest  of  the 
Book  of  Hester,  The  Book  of  Wisdom,  Jesus  the  Son  of 
Sirach,  Baruch  the  Prophet,  The  Song  of  the  three  Chil- 
dren, The  Story  of  Susanna,  Of  Bell  and  the  Dragon,  The 
Prayer  of  Manasses,  The  First  Book  of  Maccabees,  The 
Second  Book  of  Maccabees. 

All  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  as  they  are  com- 
monly received,  we  do  receive  and  account  canonical. 

3.    Of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 

There  is  a  perfect  harmony  and  agreement  between  the 
Old  Testament  and  the  New;  for  in  both,  everlasting  life 
is  offered  to  mankind  by  Christ,  who  is  the  only  Mediator 
between  God  and  man:  and  although  the  law  given  by 
Moses,  as  to  ceremonies  and  the  civil  precepts  of  it,  doth 
not  bind  Christians;  yet  all  such  are  obliged  to  observe  the 
moral  commandments  which  he  delivered. 

4.    Of  the  Creed. 

The  creed,  commonly  called  the  Apostles'  Creed,  ought 
to  be  received  and  believed;  because  it  may  be  proved  by 
the  Holy  Scripture. 

5.    Of  Original  Sin. 

By  the  fall  of  Adam,  the  nature  of  man  is  become  greatly 
corrupted,  having  departed  from  its  primitive  innocence, 


APPENDIX.  443 

and  that  original  righteousness  in  which  it  was  at  first 
created  by  God.  For  we  are  now  so  inclined  naturally  to 
do  evil,  that  the  flesh  is  continually  striving  to  act  contrary 
to  the  Spirit  of  God:  which  corrupt  inclination  still  remains 
even  in  the  regenerate.  But  although  there  is  no  man 
living  who  sinneth  not,  yet  we  must  use  our  sincere  endeav- 
ors to  keep  the  whole  law  of  God,  so  far  as  we  possibly 
can. 

6.    Of  Free-Will 

The  condition  of  man,  after  the  fall  of  Adam,  is  such, 
that  he  can  not  turn  and  prepare  himself,  by  his  own  nat- 
ural strength  and  good  works,  to  faith,  and  calling  upon 
God:  wherefore  we  have  no  power  to  do  good  works,  pleas- 
ing and  acceptable  to  God,  without  the  grace  of  God  by 
Christ  giving  a  good  will,  and  working  with  us  when  we 
have  that  good  will. 

7.   Of  the  Justification  of  Man. 

We  are  accounted  righteous  before  God,  only  for  the 
merit  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  by  faith;  and 
not  for  our  own  works  or  deservings.  Wherefore,  that  we 
are  justified  by  faith  only,  is  a  most  wholesome  doctrine, 
and  very  full  of  comfort. 

8.  Of  Good  Works. 

Although  good  works,  which  are  the  fruits  of  faith,  and 
follow  after  justification,  can  not  put  away  our  sins,  and 
endure  the  severity  of  God's  judgment;  yet  are  they  pleas- 
ing and  acceptable  to  God  in  Christ,  and  do  spring  out 
necessarily  of  a  true  and  lively  faith;*  insomuch  that  by 
them  a  lively  faith  may  be  as  evidently  known,  as  a  tree 
discerned  by  the  fruit.  . 


444  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

9.    Of  Christ  alone  without  Sin. 

Christ,  by  taking  human  nature  on  him,  was  made  like 
unto  us  in  all  things,  sin  only  excepted.  He  was  a  lamb 
without  spot,  and  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself  once  offered, 
made  atonement  and  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  world: 
and  sin  was  not  in  him.  But  all  mankind  besides,  although 
baptized  and  born  again  in  Christ,  do  offend  in  many  things. 
For  if  we  say  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the 
truth  is  not  in  us. 

10.    Of  Sin  after  Baptism. 

They  who  fall  into  sin  after  Baptism  may  be  renewed  by 
repentance:  for  although  after  we  have  received  God's 
grace,  we  may  depart  from  it  by  falling  into  sin;  yet, 
through  the  assistance  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  we  may  by  re- 
pentance and  the  amendment  of  our  lives,  be  restored 
again  to  his  favor.  God  will  not  deny  forgiveness  of  sins 
to  those  who  truly  repent,  and  do  that  which  is  lawful  and 
right;  but  all  such,  through  his  mercy  in  Christ  Jesus,  shall 
save  their  souls  alive. 

1 1 .    Of  Predestination. 

Predestination  to  life,  with  respect  to  every  man's  salva- 
tion, is  the  everlasting  purpose  of  God,  secret  to  us;  and 
the  right  knowledge  of  what  is  revealed  concerning  it,  is 
full  of  comfort  to  such  truly  religious  Christians,  as  feel  in 
themselves  the  Spirit  of  Christ  mortifying  the  works  of 
their  flesh  and  earthly  affections,  and  raising  their  minds 
to  heavenly  things.  But  we  must  receive  God's  promises 
as  they  are  generally  declared  in  Holy  Scripture,  and  do 
his  will,  as  therein  is  expressly  directed:  for  without  holi- 
ness of  life  no  man  shall  be  saved. 


APPENDIX.  445 

12.    Of  obtaining  eternal  Salvation  only  by  the  Name  of  Christ. 

They  are  to  be  accounted  presumptuous,  who  say,  that 
every  man  shall  be  saved  by  the  law  or  sect  which  he  pro- 
fesseth,  so  that  he  be  diligent  to  frame  his  life  according  to 
that  law,  and  the  light  of  nature.  For  Holy  Scripture  doth 
set  out  unto  us  only  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  whereby  men 
must  be  saved. 


13.    Of  the  Church  and  its  Aiithority. 

The  visible  Church  of  Christ  is  a  congregation  of  faithful 
men,  wherein  the  true  Word  of  God  is  preached,  and  the 
sacraments  are  duly  administered,  according  to  Christ's  or- 
dinance in  all  things  requisite  and  necessary:  and  every 
Church  hath  power  to  ordain,  change,  and  abolish  rites 
and  ceremonies,  for  the  more  decent  order  and  good  gov- 
ernment thereof;  so  that  all  things  be  done  to  edifying. 
But  it  is  not  lawful  for  the  Church  to  ordain  any  thing  con- 
trary to  God's  Word,  nor  so  to  expound  the  Scripture,  as 
to  make  one  part  seem  repugnant  to  another;  nor  to  de- 
cree or  enforce  any  thing  to  be  believed  as  necessary  to 
salvation,  that  is  not  contained  in  the  Scriptures.  General 
Councils  and  Churches  are  liable  to  err,  and  have  erred, 
even  in  matters  of  faith  and  doctrine,  as  well  as  in  their 
ceremonies. 

14.    Of  Ministering  in  the  Congregation. 

It  is  not  lawful  for  any  man  to  take  upon  him  the  office 
of  public  preaching,  or  ministering  the  sacraments  in  the 
congregation,  before  he  be  lawfully  called,  and  sent  to 
execute  the  same.  And  those  we  ought  to  judge  lawfully 
called  and  sent,  who  are  chosen  and  called  to  this  work  by 
men  who  have  public  authority  given  unto  them  in  the 
congregation,  to  call  and  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's 
vineyard. 


446  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

1 5.   Of  the  Sacraments. 

Sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  are  not  merely  badges  or 
tokens  of  Christian  men's  profession;  but  rather  certain 
sure  witnesses,  and  effectual  signs  of  grace,  and  God's  good 
will  towards  us,  by  which  he  doth  work  invisibly  in  us,  and 
doth  not  only  quicken,  but  also  strengthen  and  confirm  our 
faith  in  him. 

There  are  two  sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  our  Lord 
in  the  gospel,  that  is  to  say,  Baptism,  and  the  Supper  of  the 
Lord. 

1 6.   Of  Baptism. 

Baptism  is  not  merely  a  sign  of  profession,  and  mark  of 
difference,  whereby  Christian  men  are  discerned  from 
others  that  are  not  christened;  but  it  is  also  a  sign  of 
regeneration,  or  new  birth,  whereby,  as  by  an  instrument, 
they  who  receive  Baptism  rightly  are  grafted  into  the 
Church;  the  promises  of  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  of  our 
adoption  to  be  the  sons  of  God  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  are 
visibly  signed  and  sealed;  faith  is  confirmed,  and  grace 
increased  by  virtue  of  prayer  unto  God.  The  Baptism  of 
young  children  is  in  any  wise  to  be  retained  in  the  Church, 
as  most  agreeable  to  the  institution  of  Christ. 

1 7.   Of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

The  Supper  of  the  Lord  is  not  merely  a  sign  of  the  love 
that  Christians  ought  to  have  among  themselves  one  to 
another;  but  rather  is  a  sacrament  of  our  redemption  by 
Christ's  death;  insomuch  that  to  such  as  rightly,  worthily, 
and  with  faith  receive  the  same,  the  bread  which  we  break 
is  a  partaking  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  likewise  the  cup 
of  blessing  is  a  partaking  of  the  blood  of  Christ. 

Transubstantiation  (or  the  change  of  the  substance  of 
bread  and  wine)  in  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  can  not  be 
proved  by  Holy  Writ:  but  is  repugnant  to  the  plain  words 


APPENDIX.  447 

of  Scripture,  overthroweth  the  nature  of  a  sacrament,  and 
hath  given  occasion  to  many  superstitions. 

The  body  of  Christ  is  given,  taken,  and  eaten  in  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord,  only  after  an  heavenly  and  spiritual 
manner.  And  the  mean  whereby  the  body  of  Christ  is 
received  and  eaten  in  the  supper,  is  faith. 

1 8.    Of  the  one  Oblation  of  Christ  ttpon  the  Cross. 

The  offering  of  Christ  once  made,  is  that  perfect  re- 
demption, propitiation,  and  satisfaction  for  all  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world,  both*  original  and  actual:  and  there  is 
none  other  satisfaction  for  sin  but  that  alone. 

19.    Of  Consecration  and  Ordination. 

The  book  of  consecration  of  bishops  and  ordering  of 
priests  and  deacons,  except  such  parts  as  require  any  oaths 
inconsistent  with  the  American  revolution,  is  to  be  adopted, 
as  containing  all  things  necessary  to  such  consecration  and 
ordering. 

20.    Of  a  Christian  Mans  Oath. 

The  Christian  religion  doth  not  prohibit  any  man  from 
taking  an  oath,  when  required  by  the  magistrate  in  testi- 
mony of  truth:  but  all  vain  and  rash  swearing  is  forbidden 
by  the  Holy  Scriptures.* 

Ordered,  that  the  plan  for  obtaining  consecration  be 
again  read:  which  being  done  the  same  was  agreed  to, 
and  is  as  follows: — 

[The  plan  follows  in  the  instrument,  but  is  here  omitted, 
because  given  in  No.  5,  p.  351.] 


*  The  Articles  will  be  found  verbatim  in  the  Handbook,  pp.  34-39,  and  in  a 
note,  p.  40,  it  is  said,  "The  comparison  of  the  Articles  as  they  are  printed  above, 
with  those  that  appear  in  the  '  Proposed  Book '  and  in  Bp.  White's  Memoirs,  will 
of  itself  alone  prove  the  liberties  taken  by  Drs.  Smith  and  White  by  virtue  of  their 
appointment  'to  make  verbal  and  grammatical  corrections."  "  See  the  general  re- 
mark on  this  subject.  Ed. 


448  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

Done  in  Philadelphia,  Christ  Church,  in  convention  of 
the  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  states  under-mentioned,  this  fifth  day  of 
October,  1785.  [Signed  by  the  president  and  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  convention,  ranged  according  to  their  respec- 
tive states:  as  was  also  the  address  to  the  English  prelates, 
published  in  the  journal  of  1786.] 


Extracts  from  the  Journal. 

Resolved,  That  the  Liturgy  shall  be  used  in  this  Church 
as  accommodated  to  the  revolution,  agreeably  to  the  alter- 
ations now  approved  of  and  ratified  by  this  convention. 

On  motion,  Resolved,  That  the  Fourth  of  July  shall  be 
observed  by  this  Church  forever,  as  a  day  of  thanksgiving 
to  Almighty  God,  for  the  inestimable  blessings  of  religious 
and  civil  liberty  vouchsafed  to  the  United  States  of  America. 

On  motion,  Resolved,  That  the  first  Thursday  in  Novem- 
ber in  every  year  forever,  shall  be  observed  by  this  Church 
as  a  day  of  general  thanksgiving  to  Almighty  God,  for  the 
fruits  of  the  earth,  and  for  all  the  other  blessings  of  his 
merciful  providence.* 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  be  appointed  to  publish  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  with  the  alterations,  as  well  as 
those  now  ratified,  in  order  to  render  the  Liturgy  consistent 
with  the  American  revolution,  and  the  constitutions  of  the 
respective  states,  as  the  alterations  and  new  offices  recom- 
mended to  this  Church;  and  that  the  book  be  accompanied 
with  a  proper  preface  or  address,  setting  forth  the  reason 
and  expediency  of  the  alterations;  and  that  the  committee 
have  the  liberty  to  make  verbal  and  grammatical  correc- 
tions; but  in  such  manner  as  that  nothing  in  form  or  sub- 
stance be  altered. 

The  committee  appointed  were  the  Rev.  Dr.  White 
(president),  the  Rev.  Dr.  Smith,  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Wharton. 

•  The  preparing  of  a  suitable  service  was  left  to  the  committee. 


APPENDIX.  44  9 

Ordered,  That  the  said  committee  be  authorized  to  dis- 
pose of  the  copies  of  the  Common  Prayer  when  printed; 
and  that  after  defraying  all  expenses  incurred  therein,  they 
remit  t'  e  net  profits  to  the  treasurers  of  the  several  cor- 
porations and  societies  for  the  Relief  of  the  Widows  and 
Children  of  deceased  Clergymen  in  the  states  represented 
in  this  convention;  the  profits  to  be  equally  divided  among 
the  said  societies  and  corporations. 

Resolved,  That  the  same  committee  be  authorized  to 
publish,  with  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  such  of  the 
reading  and  singing  psalms,  and  such  a  calendar  of  proper 
lessons  for  the  different  Sundays  and  holy  days  throughout 
the  year,  as  they  may  think  proper.* 

\_The  Appendix  of  the  first  edition  here  concluded.^ 


No.  33.     Page  58. 

The  bishops,  in  the  use  of  the  Office  of  Confirmation, 
finding  that  the  preface  is  frequently  not  well  suited  to  the 
age  and  character  of  those  who  are  presented  for  this  holy 
ordinance,  unanimously  propose  the  following  resolution: — 

Resolved,  That  after  the  present  preface  in  the  Office  of 
Confirmation,  the  following  be  inserted,  to  be  used  instead 
of  the  former,  at  the  discretion  of  the  bishop: — "It  appears 
from  Holy  Scripture,  that  the  apostles  laid  their  hands  on 
those  who  were  baptized;  and  this  ordinance,  styled  by  the 
apostle  Paul,  the  'laying  on  of  hands,'  and  ranked  by  him 
among  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  has  been 
retained  in  the  Church,  under  the  name  of  Confirmation; 
and  is  very  convenient,  and  proper  to  be  observed,  to  the 
end  that  persons  being  sufficiently  instucted  in  what  they 
promised,  or  what  was  promised  for  them  in  their  Baptism, 
and  being,  in  other  respects,  duly  qualified,  may  them- 
selves, with  their  own  mouth  and  consent,  openly  before 

*  See  ante,  p.  ooo,  where  Bishop  White  says,  "The  labors  of  the  Convention 
had  not  reached  their  object."  Ed. 


450  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

the  Church,  ratify  and  confirm  the  same,  and  also  promise, 
that  by  the  grace  of  God,  they  will  evermore  endeavor 
themselves  faithfully  to  observe  such  things  as  they,  by 
their  own  confession,  have  assented  unto." 

And  to  correct  the  injurious  misapprehension,  as  to  the 
meaning  of  certain  terms  in  the  first  collect  in  the  Office  of 
Confirmation,  the  bishops  unanimously  propose  the  follow- 
ing resolution: — 

Resolved,  That  after  the  first  collect  in  the  Office  of 
Confirmation,  the  following  be  inserted,  to  be  used  at  the 
discretion  of  the  bishop,  instead  of  the  first  collect,  "AW 
mighty  and  everliving  God,  who  hast  vouchsafed,  in  Bap-  \ 
tism,  to  regenerate  these  thy  servants,  by  water  and  the  / 
Holy  Ghost;  thus  giving  them  a  title  to  all  the  blessings  j 
of  thy  covenant  of  grace   and   mercy,   in  thy  Son   Jesus  ( 
Christ,  and  now  dost  graciously  confirm  unto  them,  ratify- 
ing the  promises  then  made,  all  their  holy  privileges;  grant 
unto  them,  we  beseech  thee,  O  Lord,  the  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost;  strengthen  them  with  the  power  of  this  divine 
Comforter;   and  daily  increase  in  them  thy  manifold  gifts 
of  grace,  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  understanding,  the  spirit 
of  counsel  and  ghostly  strength,  the  spirit  of  knowledge 
and  true  godliness;  and  fill  them,  O  Lord,  with  the  spirit 
of  thy  holy  fear,  now  and  forever.     Amen." 


No.  34.     Page  306. 

In  the  convention  of  1821,  the  House  of  Bishops  com- 
municated to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  their 
disapprobation  of  what  they  conceived  to  be  a  mistaken 
construction  of  the  last  rubric  in  the  service  for  the  admin- 
istration of  the  communion.  The  reasons  on  which  their 
objection  to  the  construction  was  founded,  are  recorded  in 
the  Appendix  to  the  journal  of  that  year;  and  it  is  their 
intention  to  cause  it  to  be  entered  on  the  journal  of  their 
present  transactions.  It  is  as  follows: — 


APPENDIX.  451 

Concerning  the  last  Rubric  in  the  Communion  Service. 

The  House  of  Bishops  being  informed  of  what  they  con- 
sider as  a  great  misunderstanding,  in  various  places,  of  the 
rubric  at  the  end  of  the  Communion  Service,  think  it  their 
duty  to  declare  their  sense  of  the  same,  and  to  communicate 
it  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

In  the  Common  Prayer  Book  of  the  Church  of  England, 
the  words  in  the  parenthesis  are — "if  there  be  no  commun- 
ion." In  the  review  of  1789,  it  was  put — "if  there  be  no 
sermon  or  communion  " — and  this  has  been  interpreted  to 
mean,  that  if  there  be  a  sermon,  what  has  been  called  the 
ante-communion  service  is  to  be  omitted — against  this  con- 
struction the  bishops  object  as  follows: — 

ist.  The  construction  rests  on  inference;  deduced  in 
contrariety  to  the  positive  direction — "Then  shall  follow 
the  sermon."  Had  an  exception  been  intended,  it  would 
doubtless  have  been  expressed  positively,  as  in  other  ru- 
brics. Further,  the  rubric  in  question  prescribes,  that 
"when  there  is  a  communion,  the  minister  shall  return  to 
the  Lord's  table;"  which  presumes  him  to  have  been  there 
before,  in  the  ante-communion  service,  unless  in  the  per- 
mitted alternative  of  some  other  place. 

2d.  The  argument  on  the  other  side  proves  too  much, 
and  therefore  nothing.  It  is  said  of  those  who  urge  it,  that 
they  conceive  themselves  bound  to  use  the  whole  service  on 
a  communion  day;  whereas  it  should  'be  dispensed  with,  on 
the  same  principle  on  which  it  is  supposed  to  be  superseded 
by  the  sermon.  On  the  other  hand,  if  there  being  either  a 
sermon,  or  the  communion  should  be  thought  to  warrant 
the  omission,  can  it  be,  that  the  convention  designed  to 
leave  in  the  book  the  ante-communion  service,  with  all  the 
collects,  the  gospels,  and  the  epistles  attached  to  them,  to 
be  little  more  than  dead  letter;  never  to  be  used,  except  on 
the  few  occasions  when  the  said  service  is  unconnected  with 
either  of  the  said  provisions  ?  For  it  is  not  required  to  be 
used  either  with  the  morning  or  with  the  evening  prayer. 


452  MEHfOIRS   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

3d.  There  is  a  rubric  prescribing  the  place  in  the  service, 
at  which  notice  shall  be  given  of  holy  days,  etc.  Can  it  be 
supposed,  that  a  provision  of  this  sort  was  intended  to  be 
done  away,  not  professedly,  but  indirectly?  and  that  even 
there  should  be  no  provision  for  notifying  the  communion  ? 

4th.  It  is  understood,  that  the  morning  prayer,  and  the  \ 
administration  of  the  communion,  were  designed  to  be  dis-      7 
tinct  services,   to  be  used  at  different    times  of  the  day.  J 
Probably,  at  the'  time  of  the  Reformation,  the  practice  was 
generally  conformable  to  the  provision;  and  it  is  said  to  pre- 
vail at  present  in  some  places  in  England.     Now,  although 
there  is  probably  no  Church  in  the  United  States  of  which 
the  same  can  be  affirmed,  yet,  why  raise  a  bar  against  so 
reasonable  and  so  godly  a  practice  ?  an  effort  for  which, 
would  reduce  the  whole  to  the  sermon;  except  when  the 
communion  were  to  be  administered;  and  then  there  would 
be  the  latter  part  of  the  service  only. 

5th.  The  construction  casts  a  blemish  on  the  observance 
of  every  festival  of  our  Church.  To  speak  in  particular  of 
Easter  Sunday,  Whitsunday,  and  Christmas-day;  can  it  be 
supposed,  that  the  convention  intended  to  abrogate  the 
reading  of  the  portions  of  Scripture,  the  most  pertinent  of 
any  in  the  Bible  ?  or  that  the  members  of  the  body  were  so 
careless,  as  not  to  perceive  the  effect  of  the  word  introduced 
by  them  into  the  parenthesis  ?  Neither  of  these  was  the 
case;  although  they  had  not  the  sagacity  to  foresee  the  use 
which  would  be  made  of  their  super-addition:  a  use,  which 
may  be  applied  hereafter  to  the  abandoning  of  the  observ- 
ance of  those  festivals.  For  why  should  the  Church  retain 
them,  after  dispensing  with  whatever  is  attached  to  them 
in  the  respective  services.  The  remark  applies  equally  to 
the  two  days  of  fasting  or  abstinence — Good  Friday  and 
Ash  Wednesday.  It  is  here  supposed,  that  on  the  former, 
there  are  the  service  and  sermons  in  all  our  churches  fur- 
nished with  the  ministry.  But  according  to  the  opposite 
opinion,  the  sermon  dispenses  with  the  recital  of  the  con- 
summation of  our  Saviour's  sufferings,  and  not  only  on  Good 


APPENDIX.  453 

Friday,  but  on  every  day  of  Passion  Week,  if  there  be  ser- 
mons.    Could  this  have  been  intended  ? 

6th.  There  is  the  magnitude  of  the  change  thus  made  in( 
the  Liturgy,  without  the  subjecting  of  the  resulting  conse- )  f 
quences  to  the  consideration  of  any  General  Convention:/ 
for  this  is  here  affirmed,  without  the  apprehension  of  con- 
tradiction from  any  of  the  surviving  members.  The  most 
obvious  of  the  consequences,  and  such  as  could  not  have 
escaped  the  notice  of  the  least  attentive,  were  the  dispens- 
ing with  the  reading  of  the  Ten  Commandments;  the  weekly 
return  of  which  may  well  be  thought  to  have  a  beneficial 
effect  on  morals;  and  the  deranging  of  a  selection  of  pas- 
sages of  Scripture,  always  supposed  to  have  been  made  with 
great  judgment,  and  suited  to  the  different  seasons  of  the 
year.  They  were  of  like  use  in  the  Church  before  the 
prevalence  of  the  corruptions  of  the  Papacy;  have  with- 
stood, in  some  measure,  its  systematic  hostility  to  a  general 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures;  and,  probably,  have  prevented 
a  greater  enormity  of  unevangelical  error,  than  what  we 
now  find:  for  although  the  selections  were  in  Latin,  they 
were  at  least  instructive  to  the  many  who  understood  the 
language,  at  a  time  when  even  among  that  description  of 
people,  the  possession  of  a  Bible  was  rare.  To  the  present 
day,  they  are  held  in  a  high  esteem,  not  only  by  our  parent 
Church,  but  by  the  Lutheran  Churches  of  Sweden,  of  Den- 
mark, of  sundry  German  principalities,  and  of  this  country. 
In  some  of  the  European  states,  the  subject  of  the  sermon V 
is  expected  to  be  taken  from  the  epistle,  or  from  the  gospel  ) 
for  the  Sunday.  There  seems  no  reasonable  objection,  in/ 
any  future  review  of  the  Liturgy,  to  the  making  of  some 
abbreviation,  suited  to  the  joining  of  services  designed  to 
b~e  distinct:  but  there  may  be  doubted  the  expediency  of 
making  so  great  an  inroad  as  that  projected  on  the  service 
now  in  question. 

7th.  The  ante-communion  service  continued  to  be  used 
as  before,  by  the  clergy  who  were  present  in  the  conven- 
tion, in  which  it  is  now  imagined  to  have  been  dispensed 


454  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

with.  It  is  confidently  believed,  that  there  was  not  an  ex- 
ception of  an  individual;  although,  on  the  other  side,  the 
major  number  must  be  supposed  to  have  been  desirous  of 
the  innovation.  In  the  interpretation  of  a  law,  immediate 
practice  under  it  has  been  held  to  be  a  good  expositor ; 
especially  when,  as  in  the  present  case,  a  contrary  sense 


*  had  not  been  heard  of  for  a  long  course  of  years. 

The  question  may  occur — Why  did  the  convention  in- 
troduce the  words  "sermon  or,"  into  the  parenthesis?     It 
.  I  was  to  reconcile  the  other  rubric  referred  to,  with  frequent 

'  and  allowable  practice.     The  said  rubric  says — "  then  shall 
follow  the  sermon."     Perhaps,  when  the  service  was  com- 
piled there  was  a  sermon  on  every  saint's  day,  as  well  as 
on  every  principal  festival.     In  modern  usage  it  has  been 
otherwise;   which   made  it  convenient  to  provide  for  the 
minister's   proceeding   to   the    Blessing.     The   parenthesis  I 
means,   that   although   there   be    no   sermon,   or  although   , 
there  be  no  communion,  the  minister  shall  act  as  directed  / 
by  the  rubric. 

The  bishops  therefore  deem  it  their  duty  to  express  the  I 
decided  opinion,  that  the  rubrics  of  the  Communion  Ser-  , 
vice,  as  well  as  other  general  considerations,  enjoin  the  use  ' 
of  that  part  which  precedes  the  sermon,  on  all  occasions  of 
sermon  or  communion,  as  well  as  on  those  festivals  and  .' 
fasts  when  neither  sermon  nor  communion  occurs. 

Having  reviewed  the  above  instrument,  we  are  not  only 
confirmed  in  our  opinion  therein  expressed,  but  have  an 
increased  opinion  of  the  evils,  and  of  the  dangers  to  which 
the  contrary  tends. 

Of  these,  although  not  among  the  most  material,  yet 
worthy  of  notice,  is  its  occasional  standing  in  the  way  of  a 
courteous  interchange  of  ministerial  services  among  the 
clergy.  Those  of  the  body,  who  conceive  of  themselves  to 
be  conscientiously  bound  by  what  they  know  to  be  the  in- 
tehdment  of  the  rubric,  can  not  but  refuse  to  officiate,  with 
the  omission  of  the  ante-communion,  however  sanctioned 
by  the  custom  of  a  particular  place:  and  although  the 


APPENDIX.  455 

stated  minister  should  condescend  to  tolerate  a  practice 
different  from  his  own,  yet  the  diversity  can  not  but  have  a 
disparaging  tendency  in  the  estimation  of  a  congregation. 

Secondly.  The  conscience  of  every  bishop  is  occasion- 
ally implicated  in  the  subject.  A  deacon  offers  for  the 
priesthood,  after  administering  habitually  in  violation  of 
what  the  other  believes  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  rubric; 
while  the  one  is  to  require,  and  the  other  is  to  promise 
conformity  to  it.  On  a  presbyter's  contemplating  removal 
to  another  diocese,  he  finds  it  important  to  his  character 
and  to  his  prospects,  that  there  should  be  certified  con-^ 
formity  to  the  institutions  of  the  Church;  of  the  contrary' 
to  which  the  bishop  has  been  credibly  informed.  It  will  be 
said,  that  in  each  of  the  supposed  cases,  the  party  may 
have  conducted  himself  conscientiously,  and  agreeably  to 
his  own  interpretation  of  the  rubric.  Let  this  be  supposed 
the  case;  but  let  it  also  be  granted,  that  the  bishop,  in  tak- 
ing  his  line  of  conduct,  has  also  a  conscience  to  be  satis- 
fied,  and  a  right  of  interpretation  to  be  sustained.  At  the 
same  time  let  it  be  remembered,  that  of  those  who  reject 
the  constant  use  of  the  service  in  question,  none  plead 
conscientious  scruples  for  their  conduct. 

If  there  be  any  case  in  which  this  matter,  more  than  in 
any  other,  may  press  on  the  conscience  of  a  bishop,  it  must 
be,  when  he  is  called  to  the  duty  of  consecrating  to  the 
Episcopacy;  and  when  the  bishop-elect,  before  a  step  is 
taken  in  the  act  of  consecration,  is  to  take  on  his  lips  the 
solemn  form  of  words  prepared  for  him;  with  the  under- 
standing  in  the  minds  of  his  consecrators,  that  he  intends  a 
deviation  from  the  order  of  the  Church,  on  so  extensive  a 
branch  of  her  services  as  that  in  question. 

Thirdly.  The  misinterpretation  is  an  assumption  of  the 
whole  legislative  authority  of  the  Church;  leading,  in  its 
consequences,  to  the  setting  aside  of  a  very  great  propor- 
tion of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  In  our  former  com- 
munication we  admitted,  and  now  admit,  that  the  favorers 
of  the  innovation  are  in  the  habit  of  using  the  ante-corn- 


456  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

munion  service  on  all  occasions  of  the  administration  of  the 
communion.  We  remarked,  that  their  doing  so  was  in 
contrariety  to  their  construction;  and  that  if  others,  under 
the  shelter  of  it,  should  dismiss  the  ante-communion  ser- 
vice whenever  a  sermon  is  to  follow,  and  with  it,  the  col- 
lects, the  epistles,  and  the  gospels,  no  fault,  on  the  ground 
taken,  can  be  charged.  In  the  case  supposed,  why  should 
there  be  retained  such  useless  lumber  in  the  Liturgy  ?  This 
was  substantially  set  forth  in  our  former  communication; 
and  is  now  repeated,  for  the  purpose  of  exhibiting  the  mat- 
ter in  the  light  of  the  exercise  of  the  whole  legislative  au- 
thority of  the  Church;  and  that,  in  the  great  extent  to 
which  it  has  been  referred  to. 

To  prepare  for  a  further  elucidation  of  the  part  of  the 
canon  in  question,  we  here  transcribe  it — "  Upon  the  Sun- 
days and  other  holy  days  (if  there  be  no  sermon  or  com- 
munion) shall  be  said  all  that  is  appointed  at  the  com- 
munion, unto  the  end  of  the  gospel,  concluding  with  the 
Blessing." 

The  question  turns  on  the  sense  of  the  words  "sermon 
or,"  and  their  dependence  on  the  preceding  preposition  "  if." 
The  dictionaries  explain  this  word,  by  the  synonymous 
terms — "  suppose  that  "  and  "  allow  that,"  and  etymologists 
deduce  it  from  the  word  "give";  which  must  be  its  sense 
in  the  English  rubric;  since  otherwise  whenever  the  com- 
munion is  to  be  administered,  the  ante-communion  service 
is  to  be  dispensed  with;  an  absurdity  which  none  will  ad- 
vocate. 

The  sense  of  this  rubric  may  be  perceived  the  more 
clearly,  by  remarking  its  connection  with  that  immediately 
before  the  sentences.  The  latter  says — "  then  shall  follow 
the  sermon;"  after  which,  according  to  the  same  rubric,  the 
minister  is  to  repair  to  the  Lord's  table,  and  to  begin  the 
offertory.  The  rubric  now  in  question  does  not  dispense 
with  any  thing  before  enjoined,  but  supposes  cases  of  ex- 
ception, in  regard  to  what  is  to  follow,  saying — "if  there 
be  no  sermon  or  communion,"  etc. 


APPENDIX.  457 

In  consideration  of  the  premises,  the  House  of  Bishops 
respectfully  propose  to  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  De- 
puties the  following  canon: — 

A  Canon  explanatory  of  the  first  Part  of  the  Rubric  at  the  end  of  the 
Communion  Service. 

"Whereas,  in  the  first  part  of  the  last  rubric  in  'The 
Order  for  the  Administration  of  the  Communion/  the  allow- 
ing of  the  officiating  minister,  there  being  no  sermon  or 
communion,  to  proceed  to  the  Blessing;  was  owing  to  the 
circumstance,  that  without  such  a  proviso,  his  doing  so 
would  not  have  been  agreeable  to  the  rubric:  it  shall  be 
the  duty  of  every  minister  of  this  Church,  in  the  celebration 
of  divine  service  on  Sundays  and  other  holy  days,  to  recite 
that  part  of  the  service  which  commonly  has  the  name  of 
the  ante-communion  service." 


No.   35.     Page  307. 

ThougJits  on  the  Proposal  of  Alterations  in  the  Book  of 
Psalms  in  Metre,  and  in  the  Hymns,  now  before  a  Com- 
mittee of  the  General  Convention:  By  a  Member  of  the 
Committee. 

The  subject  shall  be  considered  as  it  respects — 1st.  The 
Book  of  Psalms  in  metre — 2dly.  The  Hymns  already  adopt- 
ed; and — 3dly.  The  adoption  of  others. 

Let  th.e  Book  of  Psalms  in  metre,  as  translated  by  Tate 
and  Brady,  be  continued  entire,  until  another  entire  trans- 
lation shall  be  presented,  and  thought  preferable  after  de- 
liberate examination  by  those  the  best  qualified  to  judge  of 
the  work,  as  to  the  integrity  of  it,  and  as  to  its  poetic  merit. 
It  is  not  understood  that  any  such  translation  is  in  readi- 
ness; and,  as  to  altering  of  the  book  in  particular  passages, 
it  is  a  course  which,  once  begun  on,  is  likely  to  be  continued, 


458  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

by  a  succession  of  changes  without  end.  Probably  the  book 
will  never  be  the  same,  longer  than  from  one  General  Con- 
vention to  another.* 

Some  are  for  printing  only  select  passages  of  the  book; 

and  the  reason  given  is,  that  the  greater  part  of  it  is  never 

,  used.     It  is  here  predicted,  that  let  the  selection  be  made 

with  ever  so  much  care,  there  will  be  complaints  of  the 

1  omission  of  passages,  which,  it  will  be  said,  ought  to  have 

I  been  retained;  and  of  the  retaining  of  others,  which,  it  will 

i  also  be  said,  might  have  been  well  spared.     This  was  suffi- 

*  ciently  experienced  in  the  reception  of  what  was  called  the 

Proposed    Book.     Where    fastidiousness   of  criticism   may 

grow  out  of  mere  difference  of  taste,  why  not  leave  every 

man  to  his  own  ? 

But,  say  they,  it  is  an  unnecessary  swelling  of  the  vol- 
ume. For  this,  there  is  an  easy  remedy.  The  metre 
psalms  are  no  part  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer;  and  no 
law  of  the  Church  will  be  violated,  if  there  should  be  edi- 
tions with  such  selections  as  the  favorers  of  the  works 
may  approve  of;  who  would  have  none  to  please  but  them- 
selves-. The  license  is  allowable  in  reference  to  the  hymns 
also. 

Let  the  hymns  already  adopted  be  retained;  because 
there  can  be  no  material  use  in  the  contrary,  and  because  it 
would  counteract  the  tendency  to  perpetual  change.  Be 
it,  that  here  and  there  we  find  a  line  or  two  not  defensible. 
Let  these  be  altered  in  future  editions.  The  alterations 
would  be  slight,  and  not  materially  affect  the  use  of  the 
present  books.  In  giving  numbers  to  the  new  hymns,  there 
should  be  a  continuation  of  those  of  the  old. 

In  favor  of  new  hymns  it  is  pleaded,  that  there  are 
some  occasions  not  specially  provided  for.  Be  it  so:  and 
let  a  few  hymns  be  chosen  for  those  occasions.  The  neces- 

*  These  remarks  were  not  designed  to  discountenance  a  measure  subsequently 
adopted  by  the  assembled  members  of  the  committee — the  appointing  of  a  sub-com- 
mittee to  report  to  an  adjourned  meeting — any  deviations  which  there  may  be  from 
the  most  correct  copies,  and  any  mis-translations  of  the  original. 


APPENDIX.  459 

sity  for  any  more  may  be  doubted  of;  considering  that  for 
the  usual  subjects  of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  and  for  the 
expression  of  penitence,  and  for  the  impressing  of  a  great 
variety  of  salutary  instruction,  we  have  an  abundant  supply 
in  the  Book  of  Psalms.  Yet,  if  there  should  be  proposed 
additional  hymns,  not  too  many,  and  not  only  correct  in 
sentiment,  but  excelling  in  poetic  merit,  no  objection  is 
here  made. 

Most  decidedly  is  there  objected  to  the  taste  of  some, 
disposing  them  to  wish  for  hymns,  in  which  the  same  sub- 
jects are  again  and  again  repeated  in  varied  phraseology. 
It  is  denied  that  this  contributes  to  devotion;  and  the  de-« 
nial  is  grounded  on  the  well  known  property  of  the  human 
character,  that  when  religious  sensibilities  have  been  often 
excited  by  certain  words,  the  repetition  of  them  is  more 
likely  to  produce  the  like  excitement  than  other  words 
comprehending  the  same  sentiments.  The  principle  is 
applicable  to  other  subjects,  and  accounts  for  the  long 
duration  of  the  effects  of  popular  ballads — especially  the 
wonder-working  one  of  the  Swiss. 

Whether  the  inviting  feeling  be  religion  or  patriotism, 
makes  nothing  as  to  the  question  of  effect.  Let  it  be  sup- 
posed that  some  poet  should  compose  a  song,  expressing 
the  sentiments  in  "Rule  Britannia,"  etc.,  and  equal  to  that 
song  in  versification.  Can  it  be  supposed,  that  the  new 
song,  on  any  occasion  interesting  the  public  mind,  would 
have  an  equal  effect  with  the  accustomed  words  ?  It  is  not 
to  be  imagined.  Much  less  would  this  be  likely  to  happen, 
if  the  new  song  should  have  a  new  tune  tacked  to  it. 

Divine  wisdom  has  accommodated  to  this  property  of 
human  nature:  of  which  there  is  an  interesting  instance  in 
Deuteronomy  xxvi.  5 — "A  Syrian  was  my  father,"  etc., 
This  was  a  form  to  be  repeated  without  variation  from  year 
to  year;  no  regard  being  had  to  the  taste  of  those  whose 
ears  have  a  relish  for  great  variety  in  words.  So,  when  the 
ark  "set  forward,"  it  was  always  with  the  invocation — 
"Rise  up,  Lord,  and  let  thine  enemies  be  scattered,  and  let 


460  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

them  that  hate  thee,  flee  before  thee:"  and  when  it  rested, 
it  was  with — "Return,  O  Lord,  unto  the  many  thousands  of 
Israel."  In  each  case,  the  same  words  were  repeated  al- 
ways: and  in  after  times,  when  the  services  of  the  temple 
were  arranged,  they  were  invariable. 

In  order  to  perceive  the  ground  of  this  procedure  in  hu- 
man nature,  we  should  distinguish  between  what  is  gratify- 
ing to  the  intellect,  or  to  the  imagination,  or  to  the  ear, 
and  that  which  is  an  excitement  of  devotion,  or  of  sensi- 
bility in  any  other  department.  The  former  kind  of  grati- 
fication requires  variety;  but  as  producing  the  latter,  same- 
,  ness  is  more  effective. 

It  is  no  objection,  that  in  the  Book  of  Psalms,  we  find 
the  same  sentiments  in  a  variety  of  diction.  Those  com- 
positions were  such,  as  present  state  of  mind,  and  present 
circumstances  of  life,  suggested  to  the  mind  of  the  sacred 
poet.  The  fact  has  no  bearing  on  periodical  returns  of  de- 
votion, whether  public  or  private. 

There  seems  no  reason  for  difference  in  this  respect, 
between  psalmody  and  prosaic  prayer.  Under  the  latter 
head,  we  have  the  stated  form  of  the  Lord's  Prayer;  and 
there  are  extant  other  forms,  attended  on  by  him  and  by 
his  apostles  in  the  synagogues.  Our  Church  has  adopted 
the  principle  in  this  department.  We  know,  that  some 
would  make  inroads  on  this  arrangement.  But  what  is  the 
consequence  ?  It  is,  that  in  their  extemporaneous  prayers, 
they  insensibly  assume  the  character  of  harangues:  on  the 
principle  above  stated,  that  variety  has  a  more  natural  al- 
liance with  exercises  of  this  sort,  than  with  the  excitement 
of  devotion. 

Accordingly,  the  design  of  this  communication  is  to  ex- 
press disinclination  to  variety,  any  further  than  it  is  called 
for  by  variety  of  subject  and  of  state  of  mind. 


APPENDIX.  461 

No.  36.     Page  320. 

Constitution  of  the  Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States 
of  America,  as  established  in  1820,  and  amended  in  1823, 
1829,  1832,  and  1835. 

ARTICLE  I.  This  institution  shall  be  denominated  "the 
Domestic  and  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America." 

ART.  II.  The  society  shall  be  considered  as  compre- 
hending all  persons  who  are  members  of  this  Church. 

ART.  III.  At  every  triennial  meeting  of  the  General 
Convention,  which  is  the  constituted  representative  body 
of  the  whole  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  these  United 
States,  there  shall  be  appointed,  by  a  concurrent  vote,  on 
nomination  by  a  joint  committee  of  the  two  houses,  a  board 
of  thirty  members  who,  together  with  the  bishops  of  this 
Church,  and  such  persons  as  became  patrons  of  the  society 
before  the  meeting  of  the  General  Convention  in  the  year 
1829,  shall  be  called  the  "Board  of  Missions  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica." The  said  committee  of  nomination  shall  consist  of 
three  bishops,  to  be  elected  by  ballot  in  the  House 
of  Bishops,  and  three  presbyters  and  three  laymen,  to 
be  elected  by  ballot  in  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay 
Deputies. 

ART.  IV.  To  the  Board  of  Missions  shall  be  intrusted 
the  supervision  of  the  general  missionary  operations  of  the 
Church,  with  power  to  establish  missionary  stations,  ap- 
point missionaries,  make  appropriations  of  money,  regulate 
the  conducting  of  missions,  fill  any  vacancies  in  their  num- 
ber which  may  occur,  and  also  to  enact  all  by-laws  which 
they  may  deem  necessary  for  their  own  government  and 
the  government  of  their  committees. 

ART.  V.  The  presiding  bishop  of  the  Church  shall  be 
the  president  of  the  board;  and  in  his  absence,  the  senior 


462  MEMOIRS  OF   THE    CHURCH. 

bishop  present  shall  preside;  in  the  absence  of  all  the 
bishops,  the  board  shall  elect  a  president  pro  tempore. 

ART.  VI.  The  board  of  missions  shall  hold  its  first 
meeting  on  the  call  of  the  presiding  bishop,  and  shall  meet 
annually  thereafter  at  such  time  and  place  as  may  have 
been  appointed  at  the  previous  annual  meeting;  and  also 
on  the  second  day  of  the  meeting  of  the  General  Conven- 
tion, at  the  place  of  its  meeting.  They  shall  publish  an 
annual  report  of  their  proceedings  for  the  information  of 
the  society,  and  present  a  triennial  report  to  each  stated 
General  Convention. 

At  all  meetings  of  the  board,  ten  members  shall  form  a 
quorum. 

Special  meetings  of  the  board  may  be  called  as  shall  be 
provided  in  their  own  by-laws. 

ART.  VII.  The  board,  as  soon  as  may  be  after  it  has 
been  constituted,  shall  proceed  to  appoint  eight  persons, 
four  of  whom  shall  be  clergymen,  and  four  of  whom  shall 
be  laymen,  who,  together  with  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  in 
which  the  committee  is  located,  shall  be  a  Committee  for 
Domestic  Missions;  and  eight  persons,  four  of  whom  shall 
be  clergymen,  and  four  of  whom  shall  be  laymen,  who, 
together  with  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  in  which  the  com- 
mittee is  located,  shall  be  a  Committee  for  Foreign  Mis- 
sions; all  of  whom  shell  be  ex-officio  members  of  the  Board 
of  Missions. 

Any  bishop  or  bishops  present  at  the  place  of  meeting, 
shall  have  a  right  cx-officio  to  attend  the  meetings  of  the 
committee,  as  members  of  the  same. 

Vacancies  occurring  in  either  of  the  committees,  during 
the  recess  of  the  board,  may  be  filled  by  the  committees 
respectively,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  board  at  its 
next  meeting. 

ART.  VIII.  To  the  committees  of  the  board  thus  con- 
stituted, shall  be  referred,  in  their  respective  departments, 
during  the  recess  of  the  board,  the  whole  administration  of 
the  general  missionary  work  of  the  Church,  subject  to  the 


APPENDIX.  463 

regulations  of  the  board.  Each  committee  shall  make  a 
report  of  their  proceedings  to  the  Board  of  Missions  at 
every  meeting  of  the  board. 

ART.  IX.  The  board  of  Missions  shall  appoint  for  each 
committee  a  secretary  and  general  agent,  with  a  suitable 
salary,  who  shall  be  the  executive  officer  of  the  committee, 
to  collect  information,  to  conduct  its  correspondence,  to 
devise  and  recommend  plans  of  operation,  and,  in  general, 
to  execute  all  the  purposes  of  the  board,  in  his  proper 
sphere,  submitting  all  his  measures,  before  their  adoption, 
to  the  committee  for  whom  he  is  appointed,  for  their 
approval. 

Each  committee  shall  also  appoint  a  treasurer.  And  the 
board  shall  designate  which  of  the  treasurers  so  appointed 
shall  be  authorized  to  receive  all  moneys  not  specifically 
appropriated,  which  moneys  shall  be  at  the  disposal  of  the 
board. 

The  secretaries  and  treasurers  shall  be  ex-officio  mem- 
bers of  their  respective  committees,  and  of  the  board. 

Local  and  subordinate  agents  and  officers  may,  when 
necessary,  be  appointed  by  each  committee. 

ART.  X.  For  the  guidance  of  the  committee  it  is  de- 
clared, that  the  missionary  field  is  always  to  be  regarded 
as  one,  THE  WORLD — the  terms,  domestic  and  foreign,  being 
understood  as  terms  of  locality,  adopted  for  convenience. 
Domestic  missions  are  those  which  are  established  within, 
and  foreign  missions  are  those  which  are  established  with- 
out, the  territory  of  the  United  States. 

ART.  XI.  No  clergyman  shall  be  appointed  a  mission- 
ary by  the  board  or  by  either  of  the  committees,  without 
the  recommendation  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority  to  whose 
,  diocese  he  belongs;  nor  shall  any  missionary  be  sent  to 
officiate  in  any  diocese,  without  the  consent  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical authority  of  the  same. 

ART.  XII.  The  Board  of  Missions  provided  for  in  the 
Third  Article  of  this  Constitution,  shall  in  all  cases  be  con- 
tinued until  a  new  board  is  elected. 


464  MEMOIRS   OF   T%E    CHURCH. 

ART.  XIII.  It  is  recommended  to  every  member  of'this 
society  to  pray  to  ALMIGHTY  GOD  for  his  blessing  upon  its 
designs,  under  the  full  conviction  that  unless  HE  direct  us 
in  all  our  doings  with  his  most  gracious  favor,  and  further 
us  with  his  continual  help,  we  can  not  reasonably  hope  to 
procure  suitable  persons  to  act  as  missionaries,  or  expect 
that  their  endeavors  will  be  successful. 


No.  37.     Page  321. 

It  is  expected  that  there  will  be  brought  before  the  en- 
suing General  Convention,  the  question  agitated  in  New 
York  concerning  the  proposed  division  of  that  diocese.  My 
present  opinion,  as  to  the  principles  which  should  govern 
in  that  and  in  every  similar  case,  is  as  follows: — 

I  am  in  favor  of  the  division  of  a  diocese,  whenever  it  is 
rendered  expedient  by  ejctent_qf_territory,  and  by  Episco- 
palian population  in  point  of  number. 

Where  these  circumstances  combine,  and  the  measure  is 
consequently  determined  on,  there  is  suggested  the  inquiry, 
shall  the  additional  bishop  be  an  assistant,  or  a  suffragan, 
or  the  diocesan  of  a  new  diocese  ? 

If  the  demand  be  occasioned  by_the_old^  age,  or  by  the 
infirmities  of  the  present  bishop,  the  new  one  may  be  the 
most  properly  his  assistant.  Or,  if  the  former  should  choose 
to  continue  his  labors  over  the  wrhole,  although  with  the 
aid  furnished,  there  is  no  principle  in  opposition.  But  much 
may  depend  on  circumstances  of  expediency. 

A  suffragan  bishop  has  under  his  charge  a  portion  of  the 
diocese.     He  retains  it  in  the  event  of  the  decease  of  the   \ 
diocesan,  whom  he  does   not  succeed.     Such  an  arrange-   ( 
ment  may  suit  local  preferences  prevailing  in  Europe,  but    \ 
would  be  contrary  to  the  habits  of  thinking  generally  pre-  / 
vailing  in  America.     Among  other  resulting  evils,  it  would 
probably  happen,  that  the  suffragan's  taking  of  his  place 
would  be  offensive  to  the  district  left,  or  to  that  to  which 


APPENDIX.  465 

he  is  to  be  transferred.  If,  to  avoid  this,  he  should  be  con- 
tinued in  the  place  of  his  former  residence,  there  may  be 
chosen  to  the  diocesan  Episcopacy  a  clergyman  considera- 
bly junior  to  him,  but  made  his  superior  by  that  measure. 
This  would  probably  be  painful  to  his  feelings,  and  to  those 
of  a  population  who  had  been  under  his  ministry  through  a 
long  tract  of  time.  There  would  be,  in  their  estimation,  a 
sort  of  patriotism  in  resisting  the  degradation  of  the  district 
in  which  they  would  be  citizens. 

The  result  of  my  speculations  is  the  opinion,  that  in  the 
case  of  a  call  for  more  than  one  bishop,  in  an  extent  of 
country  now  constituting  a  diocese,  the  most  useful  plan' 
would  be  a  division  of  it,  the  two  portions  to  be  as  inde-- 
pendent  on  one  another  as  are  now  the  Churches  of  any/ 
two  states. 

The  question  occurs,  What  would  be  the  effect  of  this 
measure  on  our  general  organization  ?  In  answer,  it  may 
be  stated,  that  both  of  the  bishops  of  the  two  contemplated 
dioceses  would  have  votes  in  the  General  Convention;  but 
that  there  would  be  required  of  it  a  legislative  act,  to  en- 
able each  of  these  bodies  to  send  their  clerical  and  their 
lay  deputies. 

Some  may  object  to  this,  as  giving  to  the  Church  in  a 
single  state,  an  increase  of  power  beyond  what  is  provided 
by  the  constitution,  on  other  points.  The  objection  would 
have  weight,  if  the  provisions  of  the  constitution  were  ac- 
commodated to  the  numbers  of  the  Episcopalian  popula- 
tion in  the  several  parts  of  the  union.  When  the  constitu- 
tion was  framed,  the  public  mind  had  not  yet  raised  itself 
above  that  excessive  attachment  to  the  peculiarities  of  the 
different  states,  which  is  in  the  way  of  consistent  adherence 
in  practice,  to  the  principle  contended  for  in  theory,  the 
founding  of  law  on  public  will. 

If  there  should  ever  happen  a  dissolution  of  the  unity  of 
our  American  Church,  the  deplorable  event  will  probably 
be  occasioned  by  the  said  inequality.  There  may  occur 
questions  having  important  bearings  on  our  doctrine,  or  on 


f 


466  MEMOIRS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

our  discipline,  or  on  our  worship.  Measures  may  be  adopt- 
ed by  a  majority,  according  to  the  constitution,  but  djssented 
from  by  an  acknowledged  majority  of  our  Episcopal  popula- 
tion. It  can  hardly  be  supposed,  and  is  contrary  to  our  ob- 
servation of  human  nature,  that  the  measures  would  be  sub- 
mitted to. 

Whether  the  separation  would  be  prevented  by  the  fairer 
representation  in  the  House  of  Bishops,  can  not  be  fore- 
seen. But  here  is  a  good  reason  not  to  object  to  the  in- 
crease of  their  number,  by  the  division  of  a  diocese,  or  to 
an  analogous  provision  for  representation  in  the  House  of 
Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

Postscript. 

Since  the  penning  of  the  opinion,  it  has  been  suggested 
to  me,  in  favor  of  suffragan  Episcopacy,  that  it  would  lessen 
the  disadvantage  likely  to  result  from  having  an  inconven- 
ient number  of  members  of  the  House  of  Bishops;  which, 
it  is  said,  may  be  prevented,  in  a  degree  at  least,  by  ex- 
cluding suffragans  from  that  house,  with  the  permission 
of  their  being  chosen  as  clerical  representatives  for  the 
other. 

First.  It  would  make  but  little  difference,  as  we  may 
suppose  that  the  larger  dioceses  only  will  be  divided. 

Secondly.  The  permitting  of  suffragans  in  the  House 
of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies,  seems  to  militate  with  the 
principle,  that  legislation  should  be  exclusively  the  act  of 
all  the  orders  of  men  whom  it  concerns. 

Thirdly.  Where  large  dioceses  become  divided,  each 
department  having  a  larger  Episcopal  population  than  sev- 
eral of  the  entire  dioceses,  it  is  unfair  that  the  bishops  of 
the  latter  should  be  of  a  higher  grade  than  that  of  the  for- 
mer, especially  when  the  incongruity  would  be  aggravated 
by  great  disparity  of  years. 

Fourthly.  The  time  will  probably  come,  but  is  not 
likely  to  be  soon,  when  a  representation  to  each  house  will 


APPENDIX.  467 

be  constituted  by  deputation  from   sundry  districts,   into 
which  the  very  extensive  country  occupied  by  us  will  be- 
come ecclesiastically  divided.     This   may  dictate   another  \ 
profitable  arrangement — that  of  an  ecclesiastical  assembly    ) 
in  each  district,  in  each  of  the  two  years  intervening  be-    j 
tween   every  two    General    Conventions.     The   assemblies/ 
now  proposed  need  not  be  limited  to  the  choice  of  repre-    \ 
sentatives,  and  may  profitably  receive  appeals  from  dio- 
cesan determinations,  in  matters  of  discipline.     With  legis- 
lation they  should  have  no  concern.     It  may  be  suggested, 
that  there  might  be  provided  an  appeal  from  the  diocesan 
Episcopacy  to  the  House  of  Bishops:  but  this  would  cause 
inconvenient  delay.     Another  expedient  might  be,  the  ap- 
plication of  the  convention  concerned,  or  of  its  standing 
committee,  to  three  conveniently  situated  bishops  for  the 
hearing  of  the  appeal.     But  a  better  should  be  in  prospect, 
in  the  contemplated  division  into  districts. 

It  is  to  be  regretted,  that  in  the  minds  of  many,  there  is 
the  supposition,  that  a  bishop  should  always  be  engaged  in 
visitations.  To  this  there  are  several  objections. 

1.  It  is  contrary  to  the  usage  of  all  ages,  except  in  re- 
gard to  bishops  strictly  missionary,  and  without  relation  to 
particular  dioceses. 

2.  A  bishop  will  generally  have  a  family,  to  whom  a 
reasonable  portion  of  his  time  will  be  as  much  due,  as  are 
any  of  his  services  to  the  Church. 

3.  The  scheme  is  inconsistent  with  the  expectation  of  a 
learned  Episcopacy. 

4.  It  will  be  oppressive  on  a  bishop  advanced  in  years, 
or  infirm. 

The  author  is  sensible  of  what  would  be  an  indecorum, 
in  his  affecting  to  influence  ecclesiastical  measures,  after 
the  time,  which  can  not  be  distant,  of  his  retirement  from 
this  earthly  scene.  But  if  on  any  subject  there  may  seem 
possible  use  in  sentiments  entertained  by  him,  he  does  not 
perceive  any  reason  for  the  withholding  of  them;  although 
there  is  much  reason  for  the  delivery  of  them  with  diffi- 


468  MEMOIRS   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

dence,  and  with  the  being  aware,  that  unexpected  motives 
of  conduct  may  occur. 

On  a  review  of  this  document,  the  author  judges  it  not 
irrelevant,  to  record  some  sentiments  long  entertained  by 
him,  as  to  arrangements  which  should  be  kept  in  prospect, 
to  be  carried  into  effect  when  circumstances  may  permit. 

Let  there  be  in  a  diocese,  and  in  some  city  or  town  as^* 
central  as  may  be,  a  church  of  which  the  bishop  is  to  be  / 
the  parochial  pastor,  and  in  which  he  is  to  preach  habitu-  - 
ally,  when  not  engaged  in  visitations.     In  such  a  church,  j 
the  diocesan  convention  will  occupy  the  standing,  and  will ', 
perform  the  duties  of  an  ordinary  vestry.     This  will  be  as 
near  to  primitive  practice,  and  to  that  of  the  Church  of  ^ 
England,  as  is  consistent  with  the  circumstances  of  our  ) 
Church.     Such  a  pastor  should  have  an  assistant  minister,  \ 
to  be  provided  for  out  of  the  pew  money.     The  mainte-  } 
nance  of  the  bishop  should  be  from  an  Episcopal  fund.          / 


INDEX. 


ABBOT,  WILLIAM,  385. 

Abbreviation  of  service,  453. 

Abercrombie,  Rev.  James,  207. 

Academy,  Episcopal,  249. 

Adams,  John,  17,  18,  22,  25,  26,  143, 

153,   1 60,  326,  328;  Letter  to,  386; 

Adams  to  Lee,  388,  390,  395. 
Address,  of  Convention  to  the  Prelates, 

348;  second  address,  358;  Provoost 

to  the  Prelates,  369. 
Affinity,  decrees  of,  35. 
Alsop,  J.,  86. 

Amusements,  44,  272,  296,  425. 
Andrews,  Bishop,  30. 
Andrews,  Dr.,  113;  his  pamphlet,  203. 
Andrews,  Rev.  Mr.,  169. 
Andros,  Governor,  xliv.,  xlvi. 
Anne,  Queen,  xxxvi.,  251,  252,  322. 
Anthon,  Rev.  Henry,  D.D.,  65. 
Antonio,  Rio  de  St.,  xiii. 
Apollinaris,  126,  134,  175. 
Apostles'  Creed,  173,  379,  380. 
Apthorp,  Rev.  East,  73. 
Archbishops,  of  England,  186. 
Arembec,  viii. 
Argall,  xiv.,  xxvi. 
Anninianism,  78,  2 1 8. 
Armstrong,  J.,  329,  391. 
Articles,    the    Thirty-nine,    17,    32,    60, 

61,  119,  193,  208,  211,  212,  217,  219, 

240,  3°3>  363.  441- 
Asbury,  Rev.  Francis,  197,  198,  411. 
Athanasian  Creed,    26,    134,    135,    149, 

376. 

Ayala,  the  ambassador,  vi. 
Ayllon,  the  licentiate,  vii. 

BAAL'S  priest,  xliv. 

Baker,  Mr.  Jacob,  410. 

Baldwin,  Rev.  Ashbel,  51,  55. 

Baird,  Rev.  Dr.,  xxxi. 

Ballads,  Swiss,  459. 

Baltimore,  Lord,  xxxii.,  15. 

Bancroft,  xxvi. 

Banker,  Richard,  xliv. 

Baptism,  lay,  252. 

Baptism,  first  English,  x. ;  first  Spanish,  x. 

Baptism,  first  in  Virginia,  x. 

Barber,  Rev.  Mr.,  250,  n. 


Barrow,  Dr.,  184. 

Bass,  Rev.  Edward,  li.;  elected  bishop, 
28,  29;  consecrated,  31,  164,  210, 

395-  397,  398,  400. 
Bath  and  Wells,  Bishop  of,  384. 
Beach,  Rev.  Abraham,  84. 
Bede,  the  Venerable,  iv. 
Bellomont,  the  Earl  of,  1. 
Bells,  first  chime  of,  xlvi. 
Belsham,  Mr.,  77. 
Belsham,  Thomas,  213,  216. 
Berkley,  Dean,  xxxix. 
Bermudas,  the,  xvii.,  xxiv. 
Bible,  bad  editions,  49;  standard  edition, 

55,  273- 

Biddle,  Charles,  39. 
Bingham,  on  the  Church,  240. 
Bishops'  churches,  468. 
Bishops,  House  of,  263. 
Bishop  of  London,  xxviii.,  xxxiii.,  xxxv., 

xli;  15,  17,  18,  75,  no. 
Bisset,  Rev.  John,  77. 
Blackstone,    Rev.  William,   xviii.,  xx., 

xxi.,  xxxix. 
Blackwell,  Mr.,  84. 
Blair,  Commissary,  xxxvi. 
Bloomer,  Rev.  Mr.,  84. 
Bowen,  Bishop,  46,  56. 
Bray,  Dr.,  xxxv. 
Brazil,  Island  of,  vi. 
Bright,  Rev.  Mr.,  xxi. 
Broadside,  of  records,  86,  n. 
Brownell,  Bishop,  51. 
Brownists,  xxi. 
Brown,  the  Brothers,  xxi. 
Buck,  Chaplain,  xxiv. 
Bulfinch,  Dr.,  xlvii. 
Bullivant,  Dr.,  xliv. 
Burlington,  xxxvii. 

CABOT,  JOHN,  discovers  America,  vi. 

Candidates,  for  Orders,  39,  365. 

Caner,  Rev.  Dr.,  xlvi. 

Canons,  40,  63. 

Canterbury,  Archbishop  of,  xvii.,  xviii., 
xliii.,  xliv.,  liii;  22,  24,  26,  27,  30, 
142,  148,  151,  152,  155,  162,  186, 
333,  341,  367,  3.68,  386. 

Cape  Cod,  xv.,  xvii. 


470 


INDEX. 


Carlisle,  Christopher,  ix. 

Carlton,  Sir  Guy,  335. 

Carroll,  Bishop,  152. 

Case  of  the  Episcopal  Churches,  hv.,  99. 

Chaloner,  John,  93,  n. 

Chandler,  Dr.,  73,  76,  335,  386;  Bishop, 

»37- 

Chants  and  tunes,  proposed,  253. 
Charles  I.,  xvi,  251,  322. 
Charles  II.,  264. 
Chase,  Bishop  Philander,  D.D.,  53,  67; 

consecrated,   273;  on  theatres,   296, 

314,  3i6,  3'9- 

Chetwood,  John,  86. 

Chew,  Mr.,  154. 

Christian  Knowledge  Society,  59. 

Churches,  burnt,  xlii. 

Church,  Christ  Church,  Boston,  xlv., 
xlvi. 

Church,  Danish,  1 8,  64,  328. 

Church  of  England,  iv.,  viii. ;  in  the  Col- 
onies, 14,  15;  requirements  of,  228. 

Church  of  Holland,  342. 

Church  of  Sweden,  xxxiv. 

Church,  the  American,  formation  of,  19, 
20,  91,  92,  93. 

Church,  Trinity,  Boston,  xliv.,  xlvi. 

Claggett,  Rev.  Thomas  John,  D.D., 
elected  bishop,  30,  34. 

Clarke,  Dr.,  374. 

Clarke,  Dr.  Samuel,  xlviii. 

Clarke,  Rev.  James  Freeman,  li. 

Clarkson,  Matthew,  86,  93. 

Coddington,  xx. 

Coke,  Rev.  Dr.,  195,  199,  408. 

Colebatch,  Rev.  Mr.,  xxxii. 

College  of  Philadelphia,  101. 

Colonization,  58,  298. 

Columbus,  vi.,  vii. 

Commissioners,  Royal,  xxiii.,  xlii. 

Common  Prayer,  172;  copyright  on, 
262;  anecdote  on,  279,  294;  altera- 
tions, 355,  378,  380. 

Common  Prayer,  Book  of,  established, 
29,  40;  copyright  on,  44;  editions 
of,  48;  typographical  errors  in,  48, 
53,  55!  m  French,  69;  German,  72, 
84,  322;  Proposed  Book  of,  xlviii, 
121 ;  reception  of  Proposed  Book, 
127,  170,  172;  copyright  on,  262; 
anecdote  on,  279;  mentioned,  294, 
483;  alterations,  355,  378,  380,  431, 
435;  anthems  of,  423;  sale  of,  449. 

Communion,  celebrated  by  Wolfall,  ix. 

Communion,  received  by  Ayllon,  vii. 

Communion,  the  first,  vii.;  first  Eng- 
lish, ix. 

Companion  to  the  Altar,  234. 


>f,  57> 

Congregational ists,  xl.,  lii. 
Connecticut,  Church  in,  xl;  Clergy  in,  xl. 
Constitution  of  the  Church,  402,  405, 

428. 

Convention,  Special  (General),  51. 
Conventions,    Triennial,   xlviii,   27,  30, 

33.  35.  37,  4i,  53,  55,  60,  65,  230, 

281. 

Cooper,  Edward,  385. 
Coppin,  the  Pilot,  xv.,  «. 
Cornbury,  Lord,  xxxvii. 
Cornwallis,  Dr.,  100. 
Cotton,  Rev.  John,  xx.,  lii. 
Council  of  Thirteen,  xiv. 
Cranmer,  Archbishop,  301. 
Creed,  23,  25. 

Croes,  Bishop,  41,  43;  consecrated,  267. 
Cromwell,  xlii.,  83. 
Cummings,  movement  of,  163. 
Cutler,  Rev.  Samuel,  xl.,  xlvi. 
Cutting,  Mr.,  86. 

DARE,  VIRGINIA,  x. 

Dehon,  Bishop,  37. 

De  Hart,  John,  86. 

De  Lancy,  Rev.  William  H.,  56. 

Delaware,  Church  in,  xxxviii. 

Dellam,  Mr.,  413. 

Denmark,  Court  of,  85,  130. 

Denmark,  King  of,  18,  64,  328. 

Dennis,  Richard,  84. 

Dermer,  Capt.,  xvi. 

Descent  into  Hell,  126,  133,  139,  174, 
181,  191. 

Dickes,  W.,  383. 

Digges,  Sir  Dudley,  xxiv. 

Disunion  of  Church,  465. 

Doddridge,  Rev.  Joseph,  248. 

Drake,  384. 

Duane,  Hon.  James,  86,  138. 

Duchd,  Dr.,  xxxv.,  Hii. 

Dudley,  Joseph,  President,  xliii.,  Gov- 
ernor, 1. 

Duels,  persons  killed  at,  34,  45. 

Duke  of  York,  xxix. 

Dutch,  the,  xiv.,  xxix. 

EASTER,  finding  of,  48,  294. 

Eaton,  Rev.  Mr.,  145. 

Edminston,  Rev.  Mr.,  1.5. 

Education,  51,  52. 

Edward,  VI.,  97,  264. 

Election,  230. 

Episcopacy,  xxviii.,  15,  19;  controversy 
on,  72,  73,  76,  79,  so,  88,  91,  96,  100, 
no,  in,  113;  Non -succession,  311, 
39' • 


INDEX. 


471 


Episcopal  Succession,  144,  162,  163. 
Episcopate,  non-succession  in,  61. 
Episcopate,  the,  Letter  on  by  Connecti- 
cut Clergy,  330. 
Establishments,  14. 

FALMOUTH,  27. 

Farmer,  A.  W.,  Letters  of,  xli. 

Fayerweather,  Rev.  Mr.,  xl. 

Fen  ton,  Charles,  43. 

Ferdinando,  Simon,  x. 

Fiddes,  Dr.,  184. 

Five  Points  of  Calvinism,  218. 

Fourth  of  July,  Service  for,  1 1 7,  433,  448. 

Franklin,  Dr.  Benjamin,  140,  370,  373. 

Fraser,  Rev.  Mr.,  84. 

Freeman,  Rev.  James,  xlvii. 

French,  in  New  York,  43. 

French,  the,  xiv. 

Fuller,  the  historian,  97,  98. 

GAIXE,  HUGH,  48,  53. 

Georgia,  Church  in,  xxxviii.;  Clergy  in, 
xxxviii. 

Gilljert,  Sir  Humphrey,  ix.,  x. 

Gibson,  Rev.  Richard,  xxii. 

Golden  Numbers,  294. 

Goldsborough,  Hon.  Robert  H.,  54. 

Gorges,  fSir  Ferdinando,  iv.,  xii.,  xv., 
xviii. 

Gosnold,  x. 

Greenland,  iv.,  v. 

Greenwood,  Rev.  Mr.,  xxiii. 

Griffith,  Rev.  David,  D.D.,  elected  bish- 
op, 25 ;  death  of,  27,  130,  decease  of, 
167. 

Griswold,  Rev.  Alexander  Viets,  D.D., 
consecrated,  36. 

HAKLUYT,  xvii. 
Harris,  Dr.,  43. 
Hawks,  Francis,  L.,  D.D.,  x.;  elected 

bishop,  xxxviii.,  72,  97,  ».,  321,  324. 
Heathcote,  Col.,  xl. 
Henry,  Patrick,  81,  160,  391,  392. 
Henry  VIII.,  vi.,  301. 
Hewlings,  Esther,  53. 
Hinchliff,  Right  Rev.  John,  27. 
Hobart,  John  Henry,  D.D.,  consecrated 

bishop,  36. 
Homilies,  421. 
Homilies,  the,  258. 
Hooker,  Rev.  Richard,  96,  337. 
Hopkinson,  Francis,  130. 
Hopkins,  Stephen,  xxiv. 
How,  Dr.,  43. 
Hoyt,  Colonel,  84. 
Hubbard,  Rev.  Mr.,  167. 


Hudson,  Henry,  xiii. 
Hudson,  the  River,  xiii.,  xv. 
Hunt,  Rev.  Mr.,  xxiii. 
Hutchinson,  xvi. 
Hutchins,  Rev.  Mr.,  86. 
Hymns,  35,  236,  458. 

ICELAND,   iv. ;   Bishop  of,   v.;   supplies 

for,  v. 

Independence,  American,  liv. 
Induction,  Office  of,  34,  231. 
Inglis,  Dr.  Charles,  xxxii.,  333. 
Ingram,  David,  viii. 
Irish  Church,  439. 
Isle  of  Man,  162. 
Ivers,  Mr.,  xlvii. 
Ives,  Bishop,  65. 

JAMES  I.,  251. 
James  II.,  xliii. 
Jarratt,  411. 

Jarvis,  Rev.  Abraham,  D.D.,  consecra- 
ted bishop,  31,  330,  335. 
Jay,  Hon.  John,  133,  388. 
Jenkins,  Rev.  Edward,  D.D.,  34. 
Jenner,  Dr.  Robert,  159,   384,  385. 
Jerome  quoted,  343. 
Johns,  Hon.  Kensey,  55. 
Johnson,  Dr.,  293. 
Johnson,  Dr.  William  Samuel,  264. 
Jones,  Rev.  Cave,  221. 
Josephus  quoted,  241. 

KEITH,  REV.  MR.,  xxxiv.,  xxxvii.,  xxxix. 

Keen,  Peter,  85. 

Keene,  Rev.  J.,  187. 

Keene,  Samuel,  100. 

Kemp,  Bishop,  41,  414. 

Kemper,  Rev.  Jackson,  54. 

Kennydy,  Captain,  377. 

Kenyon  College,  65,  67. 

Key,  Francis  S.,  55,  273. 

Kilgour,  Bishop,  29. 

King,  Hon.  Rufus,  43,  250. 

King,  Lord,  94. 

King's  Chapel,  Boston,  xxiii.,  xliv.,  xlv., 

xlvi.,  xlviii.,  374. 
Kohne,  Frederick,  316. 

LAKE,  BISHOP,  xix. 

Lambeth  Chapel,  Iv. 

Lambeth  Palace  Library,  the   Popham 

MS.   at,  xiii.;  mentioned,  27,  143. 
Landaff,  Bishop  of,  147. 
Lateran  Council,  98. 
Laud,  Archbishop,  xxvii. 
Lawes,  xxv. 
Lawrence,  on  Lay  Baptism,  251. 


472 


INDEX. 


Lay  Baptism,  251. 
learning,  Jeremiah,  xlii.,  112,  333. 
L'je,  Richard  Henry,  77,  160,  386. 
lessons,  Table  of,  449. 
Lindsey,  Theophilus,  213,  216,  374. 
Litany,  the,  xlix.,  57. 
Lorillard,  George,  317. 
J,owth,  Bishop,  17;  on  the  Psalms,  243, 
246. 

MADISON,  Rev.  JAMES,  D.D.,  elected 
bishop,  28;  death  of,  37,  166. 

Magazine,  the  Churchman's,  26. 

Manning,  Dr.,  140. 

Maine,  District  of,  46. 

Marblehead,  xlv. 

Markham,  Most  Rev.  William,  27. 

Marshall,  Rev.  Mr.,  86. 

Martyr,  Peter,  vii. 

Marvel  1,  Andrew,  his  poem,  xvi. 

Maryland,  Church  in,  xxxii.;  Roman 
Catholics  in,  xxxiii. ;  toleration  in, 
xxxiii. 

Maryland,  declaration  of,  103. 

Mason,  of  New  Hampshire,  xxii. 

Mason,  Rev.  Richard  S.,  54. 

Masorets,  241. 

Mass  said,  vii. 

Massachusetts,  Bishop  of,  125;  conven- 
tion of,  1.,  89;  six  principles  of, 
89. 

Maverick,  Samuel,  xviii.,  xxii.,  xlii. 

May  Flower,  the  ship,  xi.,  xii. 

Mayhew,  Dr.,  xli.,  73,  84. 

Mcllvaine,  Right  Rev.  C.  P.,  66. 

McSparran,  xxxix. 

Meade,  William,  D.D.,  Bishop,  61. 

Memorial,  of  New  Jersey  to  General 
Convention,  355. 

Meredith,  William,  43. 

Methodists,  the,  xxviii.,  195;  proposi- 
tions for  union,  196,  197. 

Missionary  Society,  domestic  and  foreign, 
56,  64,  71,  461. 

Missions,  their  management,  320. 

Miller,  Mr.,  xlviii. 

Miller,  Rev.  John,  xxx. 

Milnor,  James,  256. 

Ministry  Act,  the,  xxx. 

Monhegan,  the  landing  at,  xii.;  sermon 
at,  xii. 

Montague,  Rev.  Wm.,  xlix. 

Montgomery,  Thomas  F.,  99. 

Moody,  Rev.  Joshua,  xlii. 

Moore,  Archbishop,  27,  100. 

Moore,  G.  H.,  xxxi. 

Moore,  Rev.  Benjamin,  D.D.,  elected 
bishop,  32,  84. 


Moore,  Rev.  Richard  C.  Moore,  conse- 
crated bishop,  38. 
Moore,  T.,  86. 
Morrell,  Rev.  William,  xviii. 
Morton,  of  Merry  Mount,  xviii.  xxii. 
Moses,  Ivi. 

Moss,  Right  Rev.  Charles,  27. 
Mount  Desert,  xiv. 
Muhlenberg,  Rev.  William  A.,  D.D.,  46, 

5i.  54- 
Murray,  Dr.  Alexander,  114,  297. 

NARRAGANSETT,  Church  at,  200. 

Newbury,  xlv. 

New  Brunswick,  Convention  at,  19,  128. 

New  England,  Churches  of,  401. 

New  England,  first  sermon  in,  xiii. ;  first 

colony  in,  xiii. ;  colonization  of,  xvi. 
New  England,  lost  city  of,  ix. 
Newfoundland,  xviii. 
New  Jersey,  Clergy  in,  xxxvi. 
New  Hampshire,  399. 
New  Hampshire,  Liberty  in,  xxii. 
New  Haven,  school  at,  52. 
N£W  York,  the  Colonial  Church  of,  xxix. ; 

Jesuits  in,  xxix.;  Lutheran  and  Dutch 

in,  xxx.;  religion  in,  xxx. 
Nicene  Creed,  379,  381. 
Nichols,  Sir  John,  251.  • 

Nicolls,  Governor,  xxix. 
Non-Conformists  in  Virginia,  xxvi.,  xxviii. 
Norombega,  viii.,  ix. 
North  Carolina,  Church  in,  xxxv. ;  Clergy 

in,  xxxvi. 

Norwich,  the  Bishop  of,  liii. 
Nova  Scotia,  Bishops  of,  78,  400. 

OGDEN,  REV.  UZAL,  84,  138;  left  the 

Church,  221. 
Ohio,  Church  in,  46. 
Onderdonk,  Rev.  Benjamin  T.,  56,  61; 

Bishop,  65. 

Onderdonk,  Right  Rev.  H.  U.,  D.D.,  65. 
Ordinal,  change  in,  191. 
Oxford,  Bishop  of,  146. 

PAGE,  HON.  MR.,  116. 

Palmer,  S.,  235. 

Parker,  Rev.  Samuel,  D.D.,  xlvii.,  li., 

34,  86,  in,  163,  167,  170,  399. 
Parliament,  British,  329. 
Passion  Week,  304. 
Pastoral  Address,  36,  46,  60,  425. 
Pederson,  Peter,  64. 
Pennsylvania,  Church  in,  xxxiv.;  Clergy 

of,  14;  Council's  Certificate,  390. 
Perry,  Bishop,  19. 
Perry,  Rev.  Philo,  221. 


INDEX, 


473 


Perth  Amboy,  Church  at,  xxxvi. 

Perthuck,  Rev.  Ed.,  xxxvi. 

Peterborough,  Bishop  of,  384. 

Peters,  Hugh,  xx. 

Peters,  Rev.  Samuel,  xli. 

Peters,  Richard,  86,  125,  160,  392. 

Petne,  Bishop,  29. 

Pettigrew,  Rev.  Charles,  211,  411,  414. 

Pilgrims,  xiv.,  xx. 

Pilmore,  Rev.  Mr.,  132. 

Plymouth,  xiv..  xv.,  xvi. 

Pochahontas,  xxv. 

Poinet,  93. 

Ponce  de  Leon,  vii. 

Popham  Colony,  xiii.,  xiv. 

Position  of  Churches,  319. 

Porteus,  Dr.,  lv.,  260 

Potter,  Archbishop,  95. 

Potter,  Bishop  Alonzo,  lv. 

Powell,  Samuel,  86,  352. 

Prato,  Albert  de,  vii. 

Prayers  for  the  King,  82. 

Prelates,  the  English,  353,  354,  360. 

Presbyters,  power  of,  343. 

Presidency,  of  House  of  Bishops,  189. 

Priest's  Orders,  207,  365. 

Principles  of  Union,  87,  89,  92. 

Pring,  Martin,  xi. 

Propagation  Society,  xxxi.,  xxxix. 

Provoost,  Samuel,  D.D.,  elected  bishop, 

25;  consecrated,  27;  mentioned,  30; 

xlix.,  31,  36,  117,  132,  211,  397. 
Psalms  and  Hymns,  48,  54,  58,  122,  176, 

236,  241,  243,  244,  245,  260,  306, 

402,  457. 
Psalter,  the,  150. 
Purcell,  Rev.  Dr.  Henry,  206. 
Purchas,  xvii. 
Puritans,  xxi.,  xvi.,  xxvi. 

QUAKERS,  xxviii.,  xxxv.,  xliii.,  75. 

RAFN,  iv. 

Ralegh,  Sir  Walter,  x. 

Randolph,  xliv. 

Ratclifie,  Rev.  Robert,  xliv.,  xiv. 

Ravenscroft,  Bishop,  53,  54. 

Read,  Hon.  James,  94. 

Read,  John,  54. 

Rees'  Cyclopaedia,  3,  1 1 1 . 

Reformation,  the,  293. 

Richmond,  fire  at,  37. 

Rosencrone,  the  Count  de,  18,  328. 

Rosier,  xi. 

Rubric  in  Communion  Service,  45 1 . 

Rudd,  Dr.  J.  C.,  46,  51,  54. 

Rush,  Dr.,  374. 

Rutt,  John,  viii. 


SAGADAHOC,  xiii. 

Sainte  Claire,  Sister,  250. 

Salteme,  William,  xi. 

Samson,  lii. 

Saphorin,  M.  de  St.,  17,  18,  328. 

Schism,  242, 

Science  College,  60. 

Scotch  Episcopacy,  27,  131,  139,  179. 

Scriptures,  the,  404. 

Seabury,  Samuel,  D.D.,  xli,  20-21;  Va- 
lidity of  his  consecration,  28;  referred 
10,29,30,84,91,  no,  in,  163; Chap- 
lain, 1 68;  declared  the  Bishop  of 
Rhode  Island  Churches,  200;  rec- 
ommended by  Connecticut,  330;  his 
letter  to  Dr.  Smith,  340;  on  the 
Methodists,  342;  opposed  to  the  ad- 
mission of  the  laity,  345;  referred 
to,  397,  400,  407. 

Seeker,  Archbishop,  xli. 

Seniority  of  Bishops,  69. 

Separation,  xix.,  xx. 

Sermon,  the  first  English  in  North  Amei- 
ica,  viii. ;  the  first  in  New  England, 
xiii. 

Sermons,  rubric  concerning,  292. 

Settlements,  in  New  England,  xiv. 

Sewall,  Judge,  xliv. 

Seymour,  Rev.  Richard,  xii. 

Sharpe,  Granville,   139,  140,  141,  370, 

371- 

Shelton,  Rev.  Philo,  247. 

Skinner,  Bishop,  29. 

Smith,  Captain  John,  xiii.,  xiv. 

Smith,  Dr.  William,  xxxv.,  26,  102, 
112,  120,  121,  187,  206,  371,  423, 
448. 

Smith,  Robert,  D.D.,  consecrated  bish- 
op, 30,  202. 

Smith,  Rev.  Ralph,  xix.,  xxii. 

Smith,  Rev.  Dr.  William,  of  Connecti- 
cut, 423. 

Society  for  Propagating  the  Gospel,  13, 

36.  42. 
Socinus,  374. 
South    Meeting    House,    Boston,    xliv., 

xiv. 

Spragg,  Mr.  Samuel,  86. 
St.  Austin,  218. 
Stephens,  John,  84. 
Stephens,  Richard,  84. 
St.  Esprit,  Church  of,  43. 
Stevens,  Bishop,  xxxviii. 
Stiles,  Ed.  J.,  55. 
St.  John's,  Portsmouth,  xxiii. 
Stone,  Bishop,  65. 
St.  Peter's,  Salem,  xxiii. 
Strachey,  William,  xxvi. 


474 


INDEX, 


Stratford,  xli. 

Suffragan  Bishops,  464,  466. 
Sunday,  observance  of,  217. 
Superintendents,  195. 
Synods,  284;  of  Dort,  219. 

TABLE,  the  right  side  of,  69. 

Talbot,  Rev.  Mr.,  xxxiv.,  xxxv.,  xxxvii., 

xxxix. 

Tale  and  Brady,  241,  457. 
Tench,  Tilghman,  55. 
Terrick,  Bishop,  liii. 
Thanksgiving,    Service   for,   xliii.,  300, 

430. 

Theatre,  See  Amusements. 
Theological  Seminary,  General,  50,  51, 

52,  59,  68,  285,  290. 
Thorne,  Sydenham,  138. 
Tindal,  252. 
Toleration,  xl. 
Trinity  Church,  of  New  York,  xxxi.;  its 

endowment,  ix. 
Trinity,  the,  116,  117,  376. 
Turner,  Rev.  Samuel,  D.D.,  54. 

UNITARIANS,  1.,  li.,  216. 
Updike,  xxxix. 
Urmston,  Rev.  John,  xxxvi. 
Ursulines,  250. 

VEASEY,  REV.  WILLIAM,  xxx.,  xxxi. 
Vermont,  Church  organized,  36. 
Verrazano,  vii.  nmm 

Virginia,   Colonization   of,    xxiii. ;    laws 

in,  xxv.;   Nonconformists  in,   xxvi.; 

Clergy  in,  xxvii. ;  legislation  in,  xxvi. 

WADDELL,  REV.  HENRY,  138,  211. 

Walford,  Thomas,  xviii. 

Walker,  John,  ix. 

Walpole,  Mr.,  78. 

Warburton,  Bishop,  97. 

Washington  College,  342. 

Washington,  George,  xlvi.,  Iv. 

Watson,  Bishop,  126. 

Wavmouth,  James,  xi.,  xii.,  xv. 

Weller,  Rev.  George,  56. 

Welsh,  the,  xxxiv. 

Welton,  Rev.  Richard,  xxxiv. 

Wentworth,  Gov.,  249. 

Wesley,  Rev.  Charles,  xxxviii.,  200. 

Wesley,  Rev.  John,  xxxviii.,  199,  342. 

Wesley,  Rev.  Samuel,  xxxviii. 

West, 'Rev.  Dr.,  116. 

Westminster  Confession,  219. 

Wharton,  Dr.,  43,  55,  448. 

Wheatley,  302. 


Whitbourne,  xviii. 

White,  Col.  Thomas,  liii.,  Iv.,  26. 

White,  Mrs.,  26. 

White,  Rev.  John,  xix. 

While,  William,  D.D.,  his  Memoirs,  iii.; 
mentioned,  xxviii.;  at  Christ  Church, 
xxxv.;  Chaplain  to  Congress,  xxxv.; 
his  connection  with  King's  Chapel 
affairs,  xlvii.;  correspondence  with, 
xlix.,  li.;  sketch  of  his  life,  liii.; 
Bishop  Alonzo  Potter's  estimate  of, 
Iv.;  his  death,  Iv.;  views  on  the  com- 
position of  the  Memoirs,  4;  elected 
bishop,  25,  26;  consecrated,  27;  men- 
tioned, 30,  34,  37,  53,  60,  65,  84,  94; 
his  pamphlet,  99;  reply  to,  107;  on 
the  Trinity,  117;  sermon  before  Con- 
vention, 130;  communication  with 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  142; 
sails  for  England,  143;  presented  to 
the  king,  156;  account  of  consecra- 
tion, 157;  sails  for  America,  161;  ar- 
rives at  New  York,  161;  on  the  De- 
scent into  Hell,  184;  views  on  psalm- 
ody, 243 ;  on  lay  baptism,  25 1 ;  omits 
clause  in  the  Ordinal,  255 ;  on  amuse- 
ments, 272,  296;  his  retrospect  of  the 
Church,  275 ;  the  use  of  his  Memoirs, 
278;  views  on  seminaries,  285,  290; 
remarks  on  Episcopacy,  318;  men- 
tioned, 394,  396,  400;  his  letter  to 
Coke,  412,  448;  views  on  the  divi- 
sion of  dioceses,  464. 

Whitehead,  Dr.  James,  226. 

Whittaker,  Rev.  Alexander,  xxiv.,  xxv. 
xxvi. 

Wickham,  Mr.,  xxiv. 

Widows  and  Orphans,  19,  449. 

Wilkins,  Mr.,  55. 

Willet,  Marinus,  86. 

William  and  Mary,  xlv. 

William  and  Mary  College,  28,  52. 

Williams,  Roger,  xxxix. 

Willing,  Richard,  86. 

Wilmer,  Dr.  William,  46,  54. 

Wilson,  Bird,  Iv. 

Wilson,  Dr.  Bird,  65. 

Wilton,  Rev.  James  T.,  201. 

Winthrop,  xix. 

Wolfall,  viii.,  ix. 

Wolsey,  Cardinal,  viii.,  ix. 

Wyatt,  Rev.  William  E.,  D.D.,  61,  65. 

YALE  COLLEGE,  xl. 
Yeardley,  Sir  George,  xxxvii. 
York,  Archbishop  of,  27,  85,  100,  360, 
368. 


A  '^       1  ^ 


/  *        / 
a,  e/ 


II, 


2.  Ti-f.  /L/\  '  liti-Uc  Av    ^t~r 


4- 


-  MX,  li 

»  <£**-<  C*A~ 


trd+Ji*.  U^   (T^i  4   M  Wl+-/b«^bl 


- 


c 


/i  /  "/ 

*r 


CLt.,   3 


^^^    4. 


r 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


A     001  008  707     o 


